RESTRICTED  
  
WT/GC/M/193  
 
22 November  2021 
(21-8770) Page: 1/193 
General Council  
7-8 October 2021    
 
 
MINUTES OF MEETING  
HELD IN VIRTUAL FORMAT ON 7-8 OCTOBER  2021 
Chairperson: H.E. Mr. Dacio Castillo (Honduras)  
At the start of the afternoon session on 7 October, t he Chair welcomed H.E. Choguel Kokala Maiga , 
Prime Minister of the Republic of Mali on the occasion of the World Cotton Day, accompanied by 
H.E. Modibo Keïta,  Minister of Rural Development and the Minister of Industry and Trade. He also 
welcomed H.E. Harouna Kabore, Minister of Commerce, Industry and  Handicrafts of Burkina Faso, 
and Cotton 4 coordinator  and the Cotton 4 delegations.1 Prime Minister Maiga  of Mali and Minister 
Kabore of Burkina Faso addressed  the General Council .2 The Director -General welcomed the remarks 
of Prime Minister Maiga and M inister Kabore and  commended them on their work to make cotton an 
important part of the WTO's negotiating agenda.3 
 
The Chair bade farewell to H.E. Silvia Elena Alfaro Espinosa (Peru ), and expressed appreciation for 
her valuable contribution during her time as Permanent Representative.  
 
Subjects discussed4: 
 
1 REPORT BY THE CHAIR OF THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE AND REPORT  
BY THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL  ................................ ................................ ...........................  2 
2 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI, NAIROBI AND BUENOS AIRES OUTCOMES – 
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIR  ................................ ................................ .............................  7 
3 WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIR OF THE 
DEDICAT ED SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT  ...................  13 
4 TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS  ................................ ................................ ..........................  15 
4.1 STATUS REPORT ON THE CONSIDERATIONS BY THE TRIPS COUNCIL ON THE 
REVISED "PROPOSAL FOR A WAIVER FROM CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE TRIPS 
AGREEMENT FOR THE PREVENTION, CONTAINMENT AND TREATMENT OF COVID -19" – 
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIR OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRIPS  ................................ ......................  15 
5 PREPARATIONS FOR THE TWELFTH SESSION OF THE MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE  .... 33 
5.1 MC12 OUTCOME DOCUMENT – REPORT BY THE CHAIR  ................................ ....................  33 
5.2 WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE – REPORT BY THE CHAIR  ......................  35 
5.3 WTO RESPONSE TO THE PANDEMIC – REPORT BY THE FACILITATOR  ................................  36 
6 WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE AND MORATORIUM ON  
IMPOSING CUSTOMS DUTIES ON ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSIONS – REQUEST FROM 
INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA  ................................ ................................ ...........................  65 
 
1 The full statement of the Chair of the General Council can be found in Annex 1 of this document.  
2 The full statements of Prime Minister Maiga and Minister Kabore can be found in Annex 1 of this 
document.  
3 The full statement of the Director -General can be found in Annex 1 of this document.  
4 The proposed agenda was circulated in document WT /GC/W/828.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 2 - 
 
  7 TRADE RELATED CHALLENGES OF THE LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES AND WAY 
FORWARD: A DRAFT FOR MC DECISION – COMMUNICATIONS FROM CHAD ON  
BEHALF O F THE LDC GROUP  ................................ ................................ ..........................  76 
8 SUPPORTING THE CONCLUSION OF FISHERIES SUBSIDIES NEGOTIATIONS  
FOR THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE OCEAN AND FISHING COMMUNITIES -  
DRAFT MINISTERIAL DECISION - COMMUNICATION FROM BRAZIL  ..............................  81 
9 PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR WTO COUNCILS AND COMMITTEES ADDRESSING 
TRADE CONCERNS – COMMUNICATION FROM ALBANIA; AUSTRALIA; CANADA;  
CHINA; EUROPEAN UNION; HONG KONG, CHINA; ICELAND; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; 
REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA; NEW ZEALAND; NORTH MACEDONIA; NORWA; PANAMA; 
QATAR; SINGAPORE; SWITZERLAND; THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF  
TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU; THAILAND; TURKEY; AND UKRAINE  .............  87 
10 PROPOSED GENERAL COUNCIL DECISION ON PROCEDURES TO ENHANCE 
TRANSPARENCY AND IMPROVE COMPLIANCE WITH NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS 
UNDER WTO AGREEMENTS – ARGENTINA; AUSTRALIA; CANADA; CHILE;  
COSTA RICA; THE EUROPEAN UNION; ISRAEL; JAPAN; REPUBLIC OF KOREA;  
MEXICO; NEW ZEALAND; NORWAY; THE PHILIPPINES; SINGAPORE; SWITZERLAND; 
THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU;  
UNITED KINGDOM; AND THE UNITED STATES  ................................ ...............................  90 
11 PAPER TITLED "THE LEGAL STATUS OF 'JOINT STATEMENT INITIATIVES' AND  
THEIR NEGOTIATED OUTCOMES" BY INDIA, SOUTH AFRICA AND NAMI BIA .................  98 
12 CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT – 
AUSTRALIA; CANADA; THE EUROPEAN UNION; ISRAEL; JAPAN; MONTENEGRO;   
NEW ZEALAND; THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU,  
KINMEN AND MATSU; UNITED KINGDOM; AND THE UNITED STATES  ..........................  107  
13 APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS TO WTO BODIES - REPORT BY THE CHAIR  ................  111  
14 COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION - REPORT ON THE 
MEETING OF JULY 2021  ................................ ................................ ..............................  115  
15 OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 117  
ANNEX 1  - STATEMENT BY THE CHAIR OF THE GENERAL COUNCIL; H.E. CHOGUEL 
KOKALLA MAÏGA, PRIME MINISTER OF THE REPUBLIC OF MALI; H.E. HAROUNA 
KABORE, MINISTER OF COMMERCE, INDUSTRY AND HANDICRAFTS OF BURKINA  
FASO; AND THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL ON THE OCCASION OF WORLD COTTO N DAY  
ON 7  OCTOBER 2021  ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 118  
ANNEX 2  - STATEMENT BY THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL, THE CHAIR OF THE GENERAL 
COUNCIL AND THE CHAIRS OF THE NEGOTIATING GROUPS AT THE INFORMAL TNC  
AND INFORMAL HODS MEETINGS HELD ON 30 SEPTEMBER 2021  ...............................  126  
ANNEX 3  - STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS AT THE INFORMAL TNC AND INFORMAL  
HODS MEETINGS HELD ON 30 SEPTEMBER 2021  ................................ .........................  144  
 
1  REPORT BY THE CHAIR OF THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE AND REPORT BY 
THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL  
1.1.  The Chair  recalled  that an Informal TNC meeting and Informal Heads of Delegation had been 
convene d by the Director -General on Thursday , 30 September . He invited the Director -General, as 
Chair of the TNC, to report on that meeting.  
1.2.  The Director -General  delivered  the following statement5: 
1.3.  Thank you, Chair. Let me join you in welcoming new Permanent Representatives and bidding 
farewell to departing ones. I have had the pleasure of receiving several of the new Permanent 
Representatives this past week.  
 
5 The Director -General's statement was also circulated in JOB/GC/276.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 3 - 
 
  1.4.  Chair, I want to thank you – and thank t he Membership, for your flexibility in taking up Agenda 
item 1 today. As you know, I am intensifying my outreach to Ministers, Leaders and Capitals trying 
to gear towards a successful MC12. In this context, I was in Paris, where I went to attend a gatherin g 
of trade ministers on the side -lines of the OECD. I understand this is a tradition that has happened 
every year and I was invited to join them. I will give a little readout of that meeting shortly.  
1.5.  Let me start by reporting that since the July General C ouncil, we have held one Informal 
TNC/HODs meeting last Thursday – 30th September. It was evident that work has intensified in all 
areas since the summer break, and again this is due to the Ambassadors kindly returning as we had 
asked them a bit early. The  Chairs of the CoA SS, CTD SS, CTS SS and NGR reported on progress 
in their respective negotiating areas. You, Chair, also made a statement on your efforts. All these 
reports were circulated to delegations in document JOB/TNC/98.  
1.6.  Although I found the Chair s' reports sobering, because of the persistent gaps and divisions that 
were evident, I ended the meeting quite a bit more heartened than when it began, because I heard 
Members recommit to the multilateral trading system, to the WTO and to a successful MC12 . Many 
Members, if you recall, made James Bond analogies - and it was a relief not to hear any references 
to "Mission Impossible". I reiterated my encouragement to delegations to focus on and deliver on 
two or three outcomes at MC12, and then look at what we will be doing post MC12 on other equally 
important files.  
1.7.  Let me also note that, on Monday, we released the WTO's Trade Forecast for 2021 to 2022. 
We have upgraded our projection for global merchandise trade growth to 10.8% in 2021, in volume 
terms – up from 8.0% forecasted in March – followed by a 4.7% rise in 2022.  
1.8.  These revisions are certainly good news, and an illustration of trade's importance as a driver 
of economic recovery. But as I said in Paris this is no cause for complacency. The trade reco very 
remains unequal. Mirroring the K -shaped recovery in global economic output, advanced economies, 
and a handful of emerging markets with abundant vaccine supplies and ample fiscal space are 
recovering strongly, but the trade performance in much of the r est of the world is lagging behind. 
The forecast projects that by the end of 2021, the volume of world merchandise trade will be up 
4.9% compared to 2019, before the pandemic. Over this period, Asia's exports will have increased 
by 14.7%. Exports from Euro pe and North America will have essentially recovered to pre -pandemic 
levels, respectively up 1% and down 0.6%. But those from Africa and the Middle East will still be 
down -2.4% and -7.2%, respectively.  
1.9.  In the weeks between now and MC12, by delivering a s trong WTO response to the pandemic, 
we can contribute to ending vaccine inequity, which is a threat to the health and economic recovery 
of everyone everywhere. A successful MC12 would send a powerful signal that WTO Members are 
committed to using trade to help all economies rebound from this terrible crisis.  
1.10.   This has been the key message I conveyed in Paris and the message I intend to be conveying 
as I reach out to Leaders and Ministers – and you will see that in the next few weeks, I will indeed 
be moving around from place to place to try to shore up support in Capitals and other places for a 
strong and successful MC12. So, if you do not see me here in Geneva, it is because this is what I 
am trying to do.  
1.11.   Now just to say a word on Paris. There were several  Ambassadors there and we also are lucky 
to have H.E. Rodrigo Y áñez, Vice Minister of Trade of Chile with us. I want to say that you are most 
welcome and hope that you will say a few words on your views of what transpired in Paris.  
1.12.   I will first say a word  on the ambience and then on the substance. With respect to the mood 
and the ambience, I think that many Ministers – and there were almost 19 Ministers and Vice -
Ministers present, which is quite a significant number - were glad to meet each other in person  for 
the first time in a long time. And some were new, so obviously they were even happier to meet 
colleagues that they have only seen by Zoom. Several were also represented by their Ambassadors. 
It was a very good atmosphere. I have to commend the Ministe r of Trade of Australia, The 
Honourable Dan Tehan, and his Ambassador George Mina for an excellent organization of this 
meeting. There was a strong collegial spirit that emerged and I could feel present in the room. That 
is not to say that Ministers did no t state their differences or were not clear that there was still work 
to do. But there was really a very constructive atmosphere in the discussions.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.13.   I provided an update of the state of play of our work, with respect to our road to MC12. Based 
on that, th e Honourable Minister from Australia divided the discussion into four segments according 
to the different topics (i) WTO reform (ii) Trade and Health – WTO Response to the Pandemic (iii) 
fisheries subsidies and, (iv) agriculture. These were the main areas that we discussed.  
1.14.   Without going into too much detail, I will summarise by saying that there was a constructive 
atmosphere and an emerging convergence to try and deliver a successful MC12. There was a mood 
that whilst we had problems, there is a chance to  positively work on several items to try to deliver 
them. I think top of that agenda was the WTO's Response to the Pandemic. And it was recognised, 
as was discussed, and mentioned yesterday by Ambassador David Walker, that time is coming to  
bring the two s trands of the TRIPS Council discussion as well as the other work that Ambassador 
Walker is bringing together based on the submissions of the Ottawa Group, Chinese Taipei, Brazil 
and others and the work done by Ambassadors Tan Hung Seng of Singapore and Che ryl Spencer of 
Jamaica – together in one piece. And thank you Ambassador Walker for that very illuminating and 
comprehensive read -out of the work you are doing to add the TRIPS issue to it, because it is all part 
of the same package. I think there was an e merging agreement that we should bring this together 
and the recognition that we need to go to MC12 on the Response to the Pandemic with that package 
– that we cannot leave the TRIPS issue behind. And I want to really say that and put it on the table. 
That means that we have to work very hard to try to find a pragmatic solution, as I keep saying, to 
the TRIPS Waiver issue. This is not something we can leave behind. So, in that respect, it means we 
have to work really hard in the remaining few weeks to try t o hammer out an agreeable compromise 
on that issue. And very often I am asked "do you think that there is such an agreement that can be 
reached" and the answer is "Yes, I do, but it is for Members to try to work this out". We are there 
to help and support in any way they wish. Certainly, there was a will by Ministers to see this happen.  
1.15.   On fisheries subsidies, there was also quite an extensive discussion. It is true and it still 
emerged that there are Members who do not yet feel the text is balanced in the  way that will enable 
them to go to text -based negotiations. But there was tremendous support and will to get this done. 
Again, I want to say that the work that has been done by Ambassador Santiago Wills was well 
recognised. And whilst not shying away from  the difficulties, I think the emerging consensus was 
let's try to get this done – it has been 20 years, and 20 years is too long. So, the issues for instance 
of – what do we do about S&DT? How do we tackle that issue? Are the disciplines strong enough on 
the big subsidisers? - are all issues that we need to sit around and try to hammer out, in addition to 
a few other problems or issues which are there. But can we do it, again ? Certainly , if we wish. I just 
want to convey to Ambassadors that there was a willingness to try to get it done on the sides of all 
the Ministers that were there. And, in fact , the Norwegian Minister also began to offer up some of 
the ways we could do that based on w hat Ambassador Dagfinn Sørli had put on the table at last 
week's TNC.  
1.16.   On agriculture, there was a recognition that this is probably the most difficult, where we are 
furthest away. There is a lot of work to be done to come together with something that woul d be 
acceptable at MC12. But again, I would say that the spirit emerged to have a basic package and a 
strong work programme – following that with specifics and not just mentioning the word work 
programme – but to put some teeth in it, and timelines. And I hope we can work hard on this. One 
issue that I mentioned in my remarks was the need to be cognizant of the impact of the pandemic 
on low -income and low, middle -income countries, and the need to take into account this issue when 
we think about food securit y and what it means. This is a real issue that these countries have to 
deal with. So again, urging that we try to come to some agreement there.  
1.17.   And the last but not the least was WTO Reform. I think what emerged was that there is a will 
to work on these re forms, but we still need to understand what it means. There are different views 
of what reform is and what it should be. Of course, one aspect that came out prominently was the 
dispute settlement system. But there again, we need to have a bottom -up process  of talking to each 
other, discussing with each other, trying to see (i) what we all mean by reform of the basic functions 
and, (ii) what process we need to put in place. I think two Members, the E uropean Union and Brazil 
have made proposals, but again, th ere is a need to discuss all of this in an organic fashion and try 
to come up with an approach for work that will be done post MC12. So, I think this was agreed.  
1.18.   Finally, on the Joint Statement Initiatives, the progress that has been made in each of those  
and what could be put in for MC12 was also reported and I think was well received. So, let me leave 
it there, Chair. Thank you for giving me the opportunity. We have many people who were present, 
so if I have mischaracterised what happened or misrepresent ed it, please feel free to speak up or to WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 5 - 
 
  add. I must say that I left the place highly encouraged by what I heard and saw and the participation 
of Ambassadors who were there was really on -point. So, I hope we can take that spirit and make it 
work. Thank yo u.  
1.19.   The Chair thanked the Director -General for her report and echoed her call to do whatever 
could be done to ensure success at MC12 . He did not expect a long discussion under this item and 
noted that statements made at the TNC meeting of 30 September  would be reflected in the minutes 
of this General Council meeting.6 
1.20.   H.E. Rodrigo Y áñez, Vice Minister of Trade of Chile delivered the following statement:  
1.21.   It is important and an honour for me to participate in this General Council because, as you 
have well br iefed from the perspective of Heads of Delegations, and as a politician that comes from 
the capital, it is very important to share my thoughts regarding the informal meeting where I 
participated last Tuesday.  
1.22.   First, I want to start by thanking the authori ties of the WTO, the Chair of the General Council 
and all of you, Ambassadors, for your efforts towards having a successful MC12.  
1.23.   Like you well said, Director -General, th e meeting in which we participated last Tuesday was 
positive both in the ambiance and in the substance , sharing our views on the discussions that we 
should have towards a dynamic exchange of ideas for a successful MC12 , in terms of the response 
to the pandemic, fisheries subsidies discussions, and the reform of the WTO. I want to stress and 
highlight the consensus in Paris regarding the relevance of the WTO as a key player in contributing 
to our economic recovery and in the response to the pandemic.  
1.24.   Also, MC12 must have deliverables and responses from the multilateral perspecti ve in the 
four priority areas identified by the DG, which have been confirmed by the Membership ; certainly, 
the compromise to work both in Geneva and in capitals towards a successful MC12.  
1.25.   What I want to stress is that there was a strong political commitm ent for this process , I saw 
engagement from the Ministers and Heads of Delegations present there. It is very important that 
this extends to the full Membership of the WTO. What, to me, resonated the most was that these 
political commitments need to transla te into consistency with the work that is being carried out here. 
Also, it takes flexibility from both part s and I saw that happening with many key players. I saw 
Ministers thinking or putting themselves into an endgame mode towards MC12 and to put 
engagem ent and political commitment to carry out this task. In that sense, Director -General and 
General Council Chair, count on Chile's commitment - but I am pretty sure that this extends to other 
Members of this organisation - for a successful MC12. We are commi tted to make the discussions at 
the political level consistent with the decisions and the discussions here in Geneva.   
1.26.   The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
1.27.   I wanted to initially ensure the DG and the room that this was an accurate recapitulation of 
the Paris meeting. I also wanted to congratulate Australia for hosting a very successful meeting. It 
went very long and that is a good sign that there was a lot of engagement. Thirdly, I wanted to 
welcome the Vice -Minister of Chi le here. I think it is very useful. One of the things that we know 
intrinsically , but which also came out of the meeting , is the need for political engagement and 
engagement from capital. It is great to have that engagement from the political level here in Geneva 
itself. Welcome, and thank you for your comments.  
1.28.   My final comment coming out of all these discussions is that w e, as an organisation and a 
Membership, have a number of important questions to ask, not just with respect to substance but 
also with respect to process and how we get over the finish line. How are we going to do that 
 
6 The Director -General's report and the reports of the Chairs of Negotiating Bodies at the 30 September 
Informal TNC and Informal HODs Meeting were circulated in document JOB/ TNC/98. They are reproduced in 
Annex 2 to this document. Annex 3 reproduces  statements by Members at the 30 September Informal TNC  and 
Informal HODs Meeting . WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 6 - 
 
  between now and MC12? I would encourag e all of us to think about how to move these processes 
forward.  
1.29.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
1.30.   We also want to give a bit of reflection on the meeting that took place in Paris. I share the 
sentiments that Ministers we re ready, engaged on all the issues that were discussed and it is really 
a call on all of us to engage with a view to find solutions. The WTO's response to COVID -19 was the 
main issue that Ministers spent a lot of time on. Of course, the other issues are i mportant, but I 
think that, given the time that they spent on this , that sends the message that they understand that 
this is an issue where the WTO will be expected to give a response. As the D irector -General  said, 
there was an understanding that there is a need for all the aspects on trade as well as I ntellectual 
Property  to be delivered , in terms of a comprehensive package. To me, what that means is that we 
need to really engage here, in Geneva, to assist our Ministers to deliver a credible outcome.  
1.31.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
1.32.   Thank you, D irecto r-General , for your summing up of what happened in Paris. Let me reiterate 
these points. First, on food security, what the D irector -General  has also touched upon, if we move 
to a new Work Programme and ignore the Work Programme agreed and mandated in 2013, 2015 
and during the 2014 General Council, there is a question of credibility of the WTO. We already have 
a Work Programme for accelerated delivery on a permanent solution to public stockholding, so I will 
again request Members to constructively engage on this subject and deliver the final outcome at 
MC12. On the WTO's response to the pandemic, we reiterate that I ntellectual Property  came up 
during the discussions held in Paris and that Ministers are willing to engage on this aspect. Once 
again, I request that Members please engage on IP -related aspects of the response to the pandemic. 
There, I have a request for the Chair of the TRIPS Council  and the Facilitator Ambassador David 
Walker to please sort this out , so that the WTO's response to the pandemic includes IP -related 
challenges. On fisheries subsidies, my only request is to refrain from using the phrases "taking 
forward" or "taking backwa rd" by the Chair. Therefore, it is requested that all Chairs of negotiating 
groups should not be judgemental on Members' proposals and it should be left to the Members to 
decide whether we are going forward or going backward.  
1.33.   The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement:  
1.34.   Thank you , Chair and thank you to the D irector -General  for her accurate report from the 
gathering in Paris , which I concur with. The spirit of support for the multilateral trading system, the 
spirit of support for tangible  results at MC12 ; but still with the realisation that we cannot do 
everything at MC12. We have to have some continued discussions on key issues beyond MC12 , in 
particular on reform. But also, a very strong political message from capitals that it is time to  
compromise. We heard that in particular in relation to the discussion on the pandemic and also in 
relation to - perhaps the most difficult issue before us - the TRIPS issue. Ministers noted the positive 
signals of the flexibility from key delegations and optimism that a pragmatic solution would be within 
reach. On fisheries subsidies as well, there was broad support for an assessment that the current 
text on the table has the elements in place that could bring us to a reasonable landing zone , but 
that it w ould require some compromises from all sides, realising that the current text does not 
represent the primary position of any Member , but that an agreement is within reach with the 
necessary political flexibility. The challenge now is to transcribe this cap ital-based willingness of 
flexibility into the negotiating rooms here in Geneva.  
1.35.   The representative of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
1.36.   Thank you Chair, thank you Director -General, thank you Vice -Minister Yáñez for being here 
and for your accou nt of the meeting which I think was very helpful, as was the Director -General's. 
Director -General, thanks for your remarks to Minister Tehan, which I will pass on of course. This is 
a longstanding tradition to use the political presence in Paris every year . But this time was different. 
We have not had an injection of political energy for years here. So it was particularly rare and special. 
As Norway has said, as we enter the end game, compromise is necessary. Compromise is difficult 
for us all here without our political masters, and I think we saw some of that magic play out in Paris. 
As Vice -Minister Yáñez has said, the challenge  is how  do we keep it here,  how do we inject it here? 
The only thing I would add to this discussion is that we must keep our Ministers continuingly engaged WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 7 - 
 
  in coming weeks with us as we seek to translate that will that they demonstrated so clearly in Paris 
to conclude.  
1.37.   There will b e an occasion next week where some of them are gathering in the G20 and there 
will be, of course, other opportunities. I think it is important that we keep them continuingly engaged 
in these four key issue areas , so that we know that they are going to offe r the right kind of backing 
for the flexibility we need to deliver. Thank you for your comments, Chair.  
1.38.   The General Council took note  of the report of the Director -General.  
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI, NAIROBI AND BUENOS AIRES OUTCOMES – 
STATEMENT BY THE CH AIR 
2.1.  The Chair recalled7 that the item remained on the agenda so that the General Council could 
continue to follow up, in a horizontal and transparent manner, on the Ministerial decisions adopted 
in Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires. His report that day was b ased on the information provided by the 
Chairs of the regular bodies on the implementation work taking place further to Ministerial mandates 
in their respective areas , and focus ed only on those issues where there ha d been developments 
since the July meetin g of the General Council. For the areas he did not mention  that day , the report 
delivered in July stood . For some issues, including the Work Programme on Small Economies and 
the Work Programme on ECommerce , there would be separate items later in the agenda.  
2.2.  Regarding the Moratorium on TRIPS Non -Violation and Situation Complaints , in the context of 
the TRIPS Council's consideration of th at matter, there had been no new substantive developments. 
In consultations on this item on 6 October, Members had largely reiterated their known positions 
regarding the applicability of NVSCs in the TRIPS area generally. The item would once again be on 
the agenda of the following TRIPS Council meeting scheduled for 13 -14 October.  
2.3.  There were a few matters to report in th e area of Agriculture. In particular, concerning the 
Ministerial Decision on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes, the notifications by a Member 
invoking the Decision for the breach of the de minimis limit for rice for the marketing years 2018/19  
and 2019/20 , had been subject to review by the Committee on Agriculture, including at its latest 
meeting in September.  
2.4.  As regards the follow -up to the Bali TRQ Decision, Members had been engaging to find a 
solution to the outstanding issue of the future o peration of paragraph 4 of the underfill mechanism, 
within the agreed deadline of December 2021. There were some concrete textual suggestions on the 
table to that end. Considering the end of the year deadline and the progress that had been achieved 
thus fa r, at the September Committee meeting the Chair of the Committee on Agriculture suspended 
the discussion on that item, with the intention to reconvene the meeting when an agreement would 
be imminent. The Chair had been consulting with Members on that issue in various formats and 
would continue to do so. Based on the outcome of the current discussions in the Committee, the 
Ministerial Conference or the General Council would need to take a decision on the future operation 
of paragraph 4 of the underfill mecha nism.  
2.5.  Regarding the implementation of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition, the sixth annual 
dedicated discussion had taken place at the September meeting of the Committee on Agriculture. 
This year had been particularly important, since for the first  time a reply to the export competition 
questionnaire was expected from all Members, including developing country Members, following the 
expiry of the grace period that had been foreseen in the Decision. The situation regarding the 
modification of schedule s pursuant to the Nairobi Decision ha d not evolved since the General Council 
Chair's last report. The Committee on Agriculture had decided to conclude the Second Triennial 
Review of the Nairobi Decision at the following meeting of the CoA, to be held in Ma rch 2022. The 
agreed timeline to conclude the Review after MC12 would allow Members to consider the topics 
which were currently dealt with under both the negotiations and the triennial review tracks in a 
complementary manner.  
2.6.  Turning  to Duty -Free Quota -Free market access for LDCs, at the following CTD meeting in 
November, the Committee would undertake its annual review of Members' DFQF market access 
 
7 The Chair's statement was circulated in document JOB/GC/2 72. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 8 - 
 
  schemes for LDCs. Although the Bali DFQF Decision call ed for the Secretariat to prepare a report on 
Members'  DFQF schemes for the CTD's annual review, delegations were aware  that it has not been 
possible for the Secretariat to circulate its report for a number of years, due to divergent views 
among some Members on its scope and coverage. The situation remain ed unchanged, but the 
upcoming annual review would nevertheless give Members an opportunity to provide updates and 
share information on their DFQF schemes for LDCs.  
2.7.  With regard to the Working Group on Trade and Transfer of Technology, at the meeting that 
week on the relationship between trade and transfer of technology, two delegations had presented 
their national experiences. Technology transfer had been noted as contributing to economic 
development. Members had found the presentations useful. No substantive d iscussion had taken 
place on possible recommendations that the Working Group could make in the future.  
2.8.  Regarding Aid for Trade, the 8th Global Review was planned for the early summer of 2022 and 
would focus on the theme of "Empowering Connected Sustainable  Trade". A central element of the 
preparation of the Global Review was the Monitoring and Evaluation exercise. Consultations on the 
design of the exercise had begun in June, and draft formats had been circulated before the summer 
break. An Informal CTD Aid -for-Trade meeting in mid -September had allowed Members to provide 
comments, and a meeting of the CTD Aid -for-Trade session would be held the following day , at which 
it was hoped that Members could agree to launch the Monitoring and Evaluation exercise. Once 
launched, Members would have until the end of the year to complete the formats, and the Secretariat 
would organize outreach events to provide technical support.  
2.9.  And finally, on Trade Facilitation, t he Committee ha d continued its work on the four -year review 
of the TFA, which it aim ed to complete ahead of MC12. At the following formal meeting of the 
Committee, a dedicated session on technical assistance and capacity building support would take 
place i n accordance with the Agreement. The rate of ratification of the Agreement remain ed at 94%, 
with 9 Members still to ratify.  
2.10.   The representative  of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
2.11.   The LDC Group will have a virtual meeting at Ministerial level among the LDCs, this meeting 
is scheduled for 19 October in order to adopt the LDC Ministerial Declaration for MC12. This is the 
guarantee that the priorities and positions of LDCs as approved by our M inisters can be taken into 
account in the current process. Among the outcomes , the LDCs will seek to ensure that certain post 
MC12 steps are included in the outcome document on the implementation of the Bali and Nairobi 
outcomes in favour of LDCs, concerni ng preferential rules of origin, the services waiver and duty-
free quota free access.  
2.12.   The representative  of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
2.13.   Pakistan invite s attention to the severely lacking implementation record of previous Ministerial 
outcomes , and to alert the Membership to the pitfalls as we approach MC12. As we have been 
highlighting in several of our statements, 'development ' remains the cornerstone of any effort at the 
WTO, and the end we seek to achieve by enhancing trade. The so -called Doha Development Round , 
therefore, holds a promise that the concerns of developing countries would be addressed and 
corrections of imbalances in the WTO agreements woul d play a central role.  
2.14.   Unfortunately, our track record of implementing our various Ministerial decisions and their 
mandated work programmes has been severely lacking , allowing questions to be raised on the WTO 's 
credibility and relevance.  
2.15.   As we approach MC12, with a baggage of unfulfilled past promises, we are also confronted 
with fresh challenges in wake of the pandemic and economic difficulties for developing countries. A 
good signal for the world, therefore , lies in delivering meaningful outcomes on lo ngstanding 
unimplemented mandates from past Ministerial Conferences. In this regard, correcting imbalances 
in Agriculture, and delivering on the G90 proposals on SDT are of crucial importance. At the same 
time, the world demands and eagerly awaits an outco me on a response to the pandemic that would 
provide safe, equitable, and affordable access to C OVID -19 vaccines, therapeutics, and equipment 
to the poorest in the world. Pakistan has been happy to contribute in all processes and at all levels WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 9 - 
 
  on the respon se to the pandemic , and looks forward to continue that engagement to make the 
COVID response meaningful and credible.  
2.16.   The WTO has suffered from many missed deadlines and unfulfilled mandates , particularly 
developmental issues linked with livelihoods and de velopmental prospects of people in developing 
countries. We should not continue to fail those people. In this regard, I would like to request you 
build a mechanism where the unfulfilled mandates and unimplemented decisions are regularly 
highlighted in this  Council and at the Ministerial Conferences , as a reminder for us to act in the right 
direction.  
2.17.   The representative  of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
2.18.   In Bali, Ministers instructed the Trade Negotiations Committee to work on the remaining Doha 
Development Agenda issues, particularly on agriculture, development and LDC issues. This work 
remains outstanding and is even more important in the context of the COVID -19 pandemic that 
continues to have a disproportionate impact on developi ng countries.   
2.19.   In Bali, Ministers instructed the Trade Negotiations Committee to work on the remaining Doha 
Development Agenda issues, particularly on agriculture, development and LDC issues. This work 
remains outstanding and is even more important in the context of the COVID -19 pandemic that 
continues to have a disproportionate impact on developing countries.   
2.20.   The pandemic has also presented significant implications for food security, with the majority 
of populations in developing countries ad LDCs faced w ith increasing hunger, the prospects of 
increased poverty, and lack of access to meaningful employment. Already, close to 180 million 
people across 58 countries are grappling with serious food consumption gaps or above -usual acute 
malnutrition, i.e. seriou s levels of food insecurity. The MC10 decision (WT/MIN(15)/44)/ WT/L/979) 
calling for Members to engage constructively to negotiate and make all concerted efforts to agree 
and adopt a permanent solution on the issue of public stockholding for food security  purposes is 
very urgent. We hope that Members can identify what can be done to make meaningful progress on 
this important objective.  
2.21.   The uneven economic recovery we are witnessing reminds us now more than ever, of the 
relevance and centrality of developme nt as a core principle and objective that should guide our work 
and negotiations towards MC12. This includes ensuring that the least developed among us are 
accorded the necessary policy space to close the development gap, ensure equitable share of gains 
from recovery from COVID -19, and deal with the urgent threats to food security and livelihoods that 
particularly affects developing and LDCs. The WTO will need to prioritise agriculture and deliver a 
food and livelihoods agenda at MC12.  
2.22.   MC12 should also rea ffirm the treaty -embedded right to special and differential treatment by 
developing and LDCs, both as a response to the COVID -19 pandemic, as well as a means towards a 
more equitable and sustainable growth trajectory and global economic recovery. In this r egard, we 
call and urge for constructive engagements by all Members to arrive at outcomes acceptable to all. 
In our view, the dysfunction of the WTO is not limited to the A ppellate Body, but in the inability of 
the WTO to deliver on multilaterally agreed m andated issues.  
2.23.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
2.24.   As we work towards outcomes for MC 12, we would like to reiterate the Ministerial mandates 
from Bali and Nairobi regarding an effective, permanent outcome on Public Stock Holdin g for food 
security purposes. The Ministerial mandate for PSH is clear: the PSH negotiations have to be on an 
accelerated, separate track; any effort to link these discussions with other pillars is undermining the 
Ministerial mandate.  
2.25.   The Joint Statement of the G33 Ministerial Meeting held in September 2021 has strongly 
reiterated the need for expeditious resolution of Permanent Solution on the PSH at MC 12 and 
reaffirmed G33 members commitment in moving forward the agricultural negotiations on mandated 
issues. The members also attested their readiness to work with the rest of the WTO Members based 
on the elements contained in the proposals submitted by the G33 Members.   WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 10 - 
 
  2.26.   If the WTO Membership cannot deliver on the mandated issues of the past Ministerial 
meetings, then first, its competency comes under question; second, it leaves a doubt in the mind 
whether it will honour in the future, the outcomes of MC12 , if any.  In a nutshell , the credibility of 
the WTO hinges on the outcomes of the Bali and Nairobi Minis terial mandates, especially when the 
food security issues have become pronounced due to the ongoing pandemic.  
2.27.   Pursuant to the Bali Ministerial Decision on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes 
and the General Council Decision of 2014 as contained in document WT/L/939, India notified the 
Committee on Agriculture that it has exceeded the de minimis level of market price support for rice 
for the marketing year 2018 -2019 and 2019 -20. 
2.28.   Market price support for rice, a traditional staple food crop, is not ified under Article 7.2(b) of 
the Agreement on Agriculture to pursue public stockholding programmes for food security purposes. 
India's public stockholding programmes for food security purposes, covering rice and several other 
commodities, have been consis tently reported in its Table DS: 1 notification since 1995.  
2.29.   The programme is consistent with the criteria mentioned in paragraph 3, footnote 5, and 
footnote s 5 and 6 of Annex 2 to the Agreement on Agriculture. Further, the stocks under the 
programme are ac quired and released to meet the domestic food security needs of India's poor and 
vulnerable population and not impede commercial trade or food security of others. For these reasons, 
the notified level of market price support for rice is covered by the peac e clause set out in the Bali 
Ministerial Decision on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes (WT/MIN (13)/38) and the 
General Council Decision (WT/L/939).  
2.30.    India has been constructively engaging on this issue with other Members in the meetings of 
the Committee on Agriculture. We do not support linking PSH outcomes with outcomes in other 
pillars. A simple, efficient, and permanent solution on extending PSH for food security purposes to 
new programs and new products is, therefore, a key deliverable. In  this regard, I suggest the 
submissions by the Africa Group and the G33 are a good basis for CoASS to take the process forward.  
2.31.   The representative of Tunisia  delivered the following statement:  
2.32.   The Chair's status report confirms once again the persistent a nd very regrettable difficulties 
concerning the implementation of outcomes on key issues agreed upon at the Bali, Nairobi and 
Buenos Aires Conferences. Tunisia reiterates its intention to honour these commitments, which are 
still priorities for developing and least developed countries (LDCs) and which would facilitate future 
decision making based on trust.  
2.33.   The consequences of the pandemic on food security have confirmed how crucial it is to agree 
on a permanent solution on Public Stockholding for Food Secur ity Purposes and on a comprehensive 
and balanced outcome on a special safeguard mechanism. The approach taken by a few Members, 
to link discussions in these critical areas to other negotiating pillars, has not only undermined the 
mandate but also contribut es to exacerbating food insecurity in vulnerable countries.  
2.34.   We continue to hope that the Twelfth Ministerial Conference (MC12) will provide the right 
circumstances for the Members to move forward in the fulfilment of these mandates and to 
strengthen the cr edibility of the WTO in future decisions.  
2.35.   The representative  of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
2.36.   On the Bali Ministerial Decision on Public Stockholding as well as on the Nairobi Decision on 
export competition, the European Union refers to past statements on record.  
2.37.   On the Bali Ministerial Decision on Tariff Rate Quota administration (TRQ) , the European Union 
is pleased to see progress made in the last Regular Committee on Agriculture on the Bali TRQ 
decision review, and in particu lar the text proposal that was submitted by Costa Rica.  We hope that 
consensus can be reached under the leadership of the Chair of regular Committee on Agriculture 
with a view to adopting a decision in time for MC12. We urge Members to engage on this issue  and 
work constructively. The European Union would underline that the outcome of this review should be 
part of the decisions to be taken by Ministers at MC12.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 11 - 
 
  2.38.   The representative  of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
2.39.   We wish to recall statements by previous speakers, and we wish to draw the attention of 
Members that decision s at the Ministerial are meant to be fully implemented , but the record shows 
that some decisions in Bali  and Nairobi have not been fully implemented and a lot of observations 
on those challenges have been made. Full implementation of Ministerial Decisions encourages 
Members to be more committed in preparatory process for any forthcoming Ministerial there will be. 
So, it is our view to encourage the full implementation of any decisi on that is adopted in Ministerial 
Conferences.  
2.40.   The representative  of Mauritius, on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
2.41.   We regret very much that the Doha Development Round has not been completed or the 
negotiations which are mand ated. We do not wish this to be forgotten as the Ministerial come across, 
what we will recall is that development remains at the centre of our discussions here and we would 
like this to be remembered as we go along towards the next Ministerial.  
2.42.   The represe ntative  of Sri Lanka  delivered the following statement:  
2.43.   We would like to echo the sentiments expressed by South Africa, India and Mauritius on behalf 
of the African Group. We are also very concerned that many decisions taken at the previous 
Ministerial meetings are not being adhered to or not being honoured. It actually surprises me the 
kind of interest that Members are devoting in relation to the delivery process that we have embarked 
on the TFA and legal instrument s which we have been negot iated subsequent to the launching of 
the Doha Round. Sri Lanka is not against such interest and enthusiasm, but we have to look at the 
issues, certain development issues, where the Doha Round could be the centre of focus and be 
resolved . Members should get  engaged in these issues because we have development issues . We 
have been a founding Member of the WTO and the GATT , so we see certain proposals which are 
before us under the G90 proposals and other developmental aspects of the Doha Development 
Agenda , which are going to be quite beneficial for us , not only during the pandemic . If we are to 
convince that being a Member of the WTO brings us benefits , the situation with relation to small 
economies like us has not been proven . We urge all Members to demonstrat e solidarity and come 
forward with the willingness to engage meaningfully in resolving and seeing some outcomes on the 
issues that are under the Doha Development Agenda.  
2.44.   The representative  of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
2.45.   We continue to reit erate our priorities and of course our needs to deliver to the mandated 
issues in agriculture and fisheries subsidies for the MC12 outcome. On agriculture, we continue to 
maintain our position and priority that the outcome at MC12 should lead to achieve th e establishment 
of a permanent solution to public stockholding for food security and a comprehensive and balanced 
outcome in the special safeguard mechanism.  
2.46.   Agriculture reform is urgently needed to create a fair and balanced discipline that address es 
the current pandemic, especially the current pandemic challenges, and its impact on food security 
and livelihood security. The implication of the COVID -19 pandemic particularly on food and livelihood 
security in developing countries and LDCs , have been underlined by G33 Ministers in the G33 
Informal Ministerial Meeting on September 16th, 2021. The G33 Ministers have also underscored 
their commitment in moving forward in agriculture negotiations in the WTO on PSH and SSM. 
Moreover, Indonesia an d the G33 co -sponsoring Members have been constructive to provide input 
on PSH discussion s by submitting proposal s in JOB/AG/214 on a permanent solution for PSH that 
could work as a basis for discussion towards MC12. Therefore, we expect that we could have  a new, 
more balanced, text that could reflect the concerns and the views of all Members , as well as proposal 
by Members that have been submitted so far.  
2.47.   On fisheries, Indonesia places great importance on the conclusion of the fisheries subsidies 
negotiat ions to finally deliver on our SDGs mandate. As we stated before and  reiterated again this 
month  during the intensive fisheries negotiations, we still consider the current text with its time -
bind and limited geographical scope of SDT , as still being imbala nced. We believe it does not provide 
the necessary SDT for developing countries and LDCs , while still providing flexibilities that maintain WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 12 - 
 
  the status quo for major subsidizers , to maintain sustainability in fisheries . In doing so, the economic 
and develop ment sector of the State s and communit ies dependent on fisheries , are also are utmost 
important. Therefore, protection of small -scale fisheries within the EEZ of coastal state Members 
should be an integral part of this discipline. We would like to stress a gain the importance of SDT 
flexibilities for small scale fisheries within national jurisdiction s for developing countries as reflected 
in the statement of the 81 Ministers during the 15 July TNC Ministerial. The high number of Ministers 
concerned about SDT  issues show how important they are  for the conclusion of our negotiation on 
fisheries. In this regard, we welcome and consider positively the new revised SDT proposal made by 
the ACP and African Groups , as another alternative option that tries to rectify the imbalance of 
asymmetries in the current text. We believe the proposal represents a very significant number of 
Members , as the ACP and African Groups represent almost half of the WTO Membership , and 
therefore should be respected and not disregarded. We look forward to the Chair's circulation of the 
new, revised , and hopefully a more balanced text that reflects the concern of developing Members 
and LDCs, taking into account the livelihoods of small -scale fishermen and their famil ies. 
2.48.   The representative  of the Central African Republic  delivered the following statement:  
2.49.   We support the statements made by the African and LDC Groups. Ministerial Conferences 
have produced a large number of decisions which have not yet been implemented and we would like 
to exp ress our concern with regard to the future of our organization. Ministers meet to take decisions 
to be fully implement ed by  Ministerial Conferences , but if that does not happen , there is no sense 
behind this. Members need to look at the assessment of the M inisterial Conferences with the aim of 
strengthening the implementation mechanisms of those decisions. The current context calls for a 
review of the implementation mechanisms of these Conferences because it is not enough to simply 
mechanically organize Min isterial Conferences , but to ensure that the implementation will be fully 
effective . This is why we need to have a common understanding of the concept of WTO reform in 
order to undertake an assessment of our entire multilateral trading system with the aim of, among 
other things, strengthen the decision making process at the Ministerial level and to ensure that we 
can fully implement the decisions and strengthen the interinstitutional framework of the multilateral 
trading system , and also to ensure that the WTO effectively contributes to growth, to health and to  
the reduction of  poverty.  
2.50.   The representative  of Cameroon  delivered the following statement:  
2.51.   We would like to endorse the statement made by the African Group , we also share a number 
of concerns express ed by delegations who have spoken before us. As underlined by Nigeria and 
other delegations, Ministerial Decisions need to be implemented and executed by the bodies of this 
organization . That is reflected in the principles , which are the structure of mutua l trust that we have 
between us . If we take decisions and then we are not capable of or refuse to implement  them,  then 
it is quite clear that the confidence in the structure will be questioned. The decisions that have not 
been executed will undermine the e xpectations of developing countries and that will further 
undermine the decision s taken by this organization, which is at the very heart of our participation. 
As we have always said, trade is not a strength in itself, it needs the development of our States , so 
we hope that under your leadership these issues that have not yet been fully dealt with , will be 
subject to a consensus -based resolution and will be rectified before MC12, so you can be assured of 
our countries' constructive commitments to all the bod ies which are tasked with decision -making 
within this house.  
2.52.   The representative  of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
2.53.   We associate ourselves with the statement delivered by Mauritius on behalf of the African 
Group.  We also echo the previous speakers in emphasizing the dire need of putting development at 
the core of our work and delivering meaningful outcome s on the DDA issues.  We urge Members to 
give priority to pandemic recovery and food security issues , and we assert the importance of 
reach ing a permanent solution on PSH  and SSM for their utmost importance to LDCs and NFIDCs. 
Also, we stress on the importance of reaching a positive outcome on the G90 proposal on SDT.  
2.54.   The General Council took note of the Chair's statement  as circulated in doc ument JOB/GC/2 72 
and of the statements  by Members . WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 13 - 
 
  3  WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIR OF THE 
DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT  
3.1.  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 on the progress of work in its Dedicated Sessions. In Bue nos 
Aires, Ministers had reaffirmed their commitment to the Work Programme and instructed the CTD 
to continue its work in Dedicated Sessions under the overall responsibility of the General Council. 
He invited Ambassador Piracha to provide his report.  
3.2.  Ambas sador Muhammad Mujtaba Piracha (Pakistan), Chair of the Dedicated Session of the 
CTD, provided  the following  report :  
3.3.  I am pleased to report that a meeting of the CTD's Dedicated Session on Small Economies will 
be held on 19 October. At this meeting, Membe rs will consider a proposal by the SVE Group for a 
Ministerial Decision at MC12 on the Work Programme on Small Economies. The proposed Ministerial 
Decision, which is to be circulated to Members today, is similar in structure to previous Ministerial 
Decisio ns regarding the Small Economies Work Programme.  
3.4.  In terms of references to past work, the proposed text notes that the recently updated 
Secretariat compilation paper on the Work Programme on Small Economies – contained in document 
WT/COMTD/SE/W/22/Rev.10 – as well as previous versions of this paper, reflect the work of the 
Dedicated Session up to MC12.  The proposed text also takes particular note of the work carried out 
since the last Ministerial Conference. This includes work on th e challenges small economies 
experience in their efforts to reduce trade costs, particularly in the area of trade facilitation; work 
on the opportunities and challenges for small economies in attracting investments; and work on the 
economic and trade impac t of natural disasters on small economies.  
3.5.  With regard to future work, the submission by the SVE Group proposes that the Dedicated 
Session focus es on integrating small economies into the post COVID -19 economy. As I understand 
it, this would include lookin g at the effects of the pandemic, as well as the challenges and the 
opportunities for small economies.  As has been the case in previous Ministerial Decisions on the 
Work Programme on Small Economies, the proposed text indicates that the CTD in Dedicated Se ssion 
shall continue monitoring the progress of the small economy proposals in WTO bodies and in 
negotiating groups with the aim of providing responses, as soon as possible, to the trade -related 
issues identified for the fuller integration of SVEs in the m ultilateral trading system.  I am hopeful 
that Members will be able to agree to this proposal by the SVE Group at the meeting of the Dedicated 
Session on October 19. Once approved, and as per the practice, the intention would be for the 
Dedicated Session to  submit a report to the General Council on its work.  
3.6.  The representative of Guatemal a, on behalf of the SVEs , delivered the following statement:  
3.7.  We thank the Chair of the Committee on Trade and Development for the report presented at 
the Dedicated Session, on the progress in the Work Programme on Small Economies. As he 
announced, the delegations of Guatemala, El Salvador and Ecuador circulated, on behalf of the Group 
of Small Vulnerable Economies (SVEs), the proposal for a Ministerial decision on th e Work 
Programme on Small Economies. As was the case in the past, the content of the statement shall be 
discussed at the next Dedicated Session on Small Economies of the Committee on Trade and 
Development, scheduled for 19 October 2021.  
3.8.  The proposal touche s upon the suggested topic for the future work of the work programme  
integrating small economies into the post COVID -19 economy: effects of the pandemic, challenges 
and opportunities. My delegation considers the topic to be relevant and crucial to SVEs, wh ich have 
been severely impacted by the effects of the pandemic.  
3.9.  We call on all Members to support the proposal, that it may be approved at the Dedicated 
Session and that the Ministerial decision on the Work Programme on Small Economies be an outcome 
of the  Twelfth WTO Ministerial Conference.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 14 - 
 
  3.10.   The representative of Mauritius, on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
3.11.   Mauritius supports the idea of the Committee pursuing a targeted and specific work for MC12 
and we believe that the WTO  can actually play a greater role in the advancement of the SVE agenda. 
As has often been repeated, our countries are very often the first to bear the brunt of global shocks 
such as economic crisis, natural disasters, and climate change. The recent hurrica ne in Haiti is a 
case in point. During the pandemic we had to impose very strict measures for lockdown and the 
impact on us economically has been very high. Given our specific situation as SVEs, small economies 
require consideration to help them to adapt t o such situations . In this regard , we look forward to 
working with the delegation of Guatemala and others so that the draft Ministerial Decisions on the 
SVE Work Programme comes up with concrete proposals that will help integrate small economies in 
the pos t COVID -19 economy.  
3.12.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the Pacific Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
3.13.   Our Group also aligns itself with the SVE statement made by Guatemala. Small vulnerable 
economies face significant challenges, we are very small economies dependent on very few exports, 
we are highly susceptible to economic shocks , and face comparative ly high trade costs. Owing to 
our remoteness, smallness and geographical fragmentation, the structural characteristics are 
exacerbated by climate change and natural disasters. COVID -19 has made worse these 
vulnerabilities in economic sectors such as tourism and other services adversely affected, and 
exports and remittances declined. Many useful topics and lessons were discussed at the dedica ted 
session held earlier this year, including on promoting investment, on the economic and trade impact 
of natural disasters in small economies and how to build resilience. The next step is how to translate 
this into framing responses to the full integrati on of small vulnerable economies into the multilateral 
trading system , as required by paragraph 35 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration . We, therefore, 
encourage Members to engage constructively to facilitate meaningful responses for integrating SVEs 
into t he multilateral trading system. The Pacific Group therefore supports the extension of the Work 
Programme on Small Economies at MC12.  
3.14.   The representative of Fiji delivered the following statement:  
3.15.   Recalling the 41st Dedicated Session held on 6 July before t he summer break, the session 
paved the way for small economies as it allowed Members to have a better and wholistic 
understanding of the unique challenges faced by the small economies in view of the varying climatic 
extremes and natural disasters that cont inue to wreak havoc on the shores of small economies , and 
which dampen their developmental aspirations.  
3.16.   In the Pacific region alone, the value of infrastructure, buildings and cash crops at risk from 
natural disasters , is equivalent to approximately USD 112 billion  annually. SIDS  (Small Island 
Developing States)  account for  two thirds  of the countries with the highest relative annual natural 
disaster losses. For small countries, the costs of post -disaster reconstruction can be exorbitant. On 
average, natur al disasters cause damage equivalent to 2.1% of GDP every year in SIDS.  
3.17.   As often repeated, this loss is further exacerbated by the impact of climate change. Changes 
in the climate, sea level rise and the intensity of climatic disasters like tropical cyclo nes, droughts 
and floods have an extremely negative impact on economies, communities, households, people and 
physical assets. As a result , small island nations are trapped in a vicious debt trap , damaging their 
productivity and ability to recover from disa sters and other structural constraints.  
3.18.   In the words of U nited Nations  Secretary -General  Mr Antonio Guterres this week whilst 
opening the UNCTAD 15 in Barbados,  "countries cannot build back if they are held back ". The direct 
onslaught of natural disasters and climate change burdened small economies into endless rebuilding , 
thus continued dependence on loans.  Already UNCTAD has warned that the situation of small 
economies is unsustainable and requires urgent global attention.  
3.19.   Fiji looks forward the refore to the impending 42nd Dedicated Session on 19 October  to review 
the paper being compiled for the session , including for a Ministerial Decision , in particular on ways 
that would promote the full integration of small economies and SVEs into the multil ateral trading WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 15 - 
 
  system . In saying this , we support the extension of the Work Program on Small Economies at MC12 
and look forward to work ing with Guatemala and others.  In closing Fiji aligns its statement with that 
of the Pacific Group, as delivered by Vanua tu. 
3.20.   The General Council took note of the report of the Chair of the CTD and of the statements.  
4  TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS  
4.1   STATUS REPORT ON THE CONSIDERATIONS BY THE TRIPS COUNCIL ON THE 
REVISED "PROPOSAL FOR A WAIVER FROM CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE TRIPS 
AGREEM ENT FOR THE PREVENTION, CONTAINMENT AND TREATMENT OF COVID -19" 
(IP/C/W/669/REV.1) – STATEMENT BY THE CHAIR OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRIPS  
4.1.  The Chair  recalled  that this item related to a status report by the TRIPS Council Chair on the 
revised "Proposal for a Waive r from Certain Provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the Prevention, 
Containment and Treatment of COVID -19" in document IP/C/W/669/Rev.1. Since the July meeting, 
the Council for TRIPS had considered the request again at its informal meetings in September a nd 
October . He therefore invited Ambassador Sørli to provide a status report on the TRIPS Council's 
consideration of the matter.  
4.2.  Ambassador Dagfinn Sørli (Norway), Chair of the TRIPS Council , provided  the following report :  
4.3.  At the meeting of the TRIPS Council on 15 -16 October 2020, India and South Africa introduced 
document IP/C/W/669, requesting a waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the 
prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19, which had been c irculated on 2 October 2020 
and has since been co -sponsored by the delegations of Kenya, Eswatini, Mozambique, Pakistan, 
Plurinational State of Bolivia, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Mongolia, Zimbabwe, Egypt, the 
African Group, the LDC Group, the Mald ives, Fiji, Namibia, Vanuatu, Indonesia and Jordan. Since 
the introduction of the document, discussions took place in various formal and informal TRIPS 
Council meetings. Delegations exchanged views, asked questions, sought clarifications and provided 
replies, clarifications, and information, including through documents IP/C/W/670, IP/C/W/671, 
IP/C/W/672, IP/C/W/673 and IP/C/W/674, on the waiver request.  On 21 May 2021 the co -sponsors 
issued a revised proposal which was circulated in document IP/C/W/669/Rev. 1. The revised waiver 
request was presented at an informal open -ended meeting of the Council on 31 May, and introduced 
at its formal meeting on 8 -9 June 2021. It has since been co -sponsored by Malaysia.  
4.4.  Since the last oral status report delivered on 27 July 2021, discussions continued in small -
group consultations, at an informal open -ended meeting on 14 September, and at an informal and 
formal meeting on 4 October 2021. On 29 September 2021, the co -sponsors circulated a summary 
of their interventions in document IP/C/W/684.  
4.5.  In the course of discussions on the revised waiver proposal, delegations held focused 
discussions on the topics of 'scope', both from the perspective of products and of IP rights, on 
'duration', 'implementation' and on protection of un disclosed information. Delegations engaged 
positively and their detailed substantive exchanges helped clarify various aspects and nuances of 
positions. While delegations remain committed to the common goal of providing timely and secure 
access to high -quality, safe, efficacious and affordable vaccines and medicines for all, disagreement 
persists on the fundamental question of whether a waiver is the appropriate and most effective way 
to address the shortage and inequitable distribution of and access to vacc ines and other COVID -
related products.  
4.6.  In addition, a proposal for a draft General Council declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and 
Public Health in the circumstances of a pandemic, issued by the European Union and circulated in 
IP/C/W/681, has also been di scussed in meetings since its circulation on 21 June 2021. Delegations 
exchanged views, asked questions, sought clarifications and provided replies, clarifications, and 
information. Disagreement persists on the fundamental question of whether this proposal  is the 
appropriate and most effective way to address the shortage and inequitable distribution of and 
access to vaccines and other COVID -related products.  
4.7.  This means that the TRIPS Council has not yet completed its consideration of the revised waiver 
request. The TRIPS Council will therefore continue its consideration of the revised waiver request, WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 16 - 
 
  including through small -group consultations and informal open -ended meetings, and report back to 
the General Council as stipulated in Article IX:3 of the Marra kesh Agreement. In addition, the TRIPS 
Council will also continue in the same manner its consideration of the other related proposals by 
Members.  
4.8.  The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
4.9.  We thank the Chair of the TRIPS Council for his effort and report , which in our view, accurately 
reflects the status of our discussions in the TRIPS Council.  We associate ourselves with the statement 
to be made by the Africa Group and the ACP.  
4.10.   This past weekend marked a full year since South Africa and India first submitted a proposal 
for a limited and temporary waiver of certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement. Circular, ideological 
debates about the role of IP are not going to contribute to the ramping -up and diversification of 
COVID -19 health product s manufacture. Article 8 of the TRIPS Agreement recognises that there are 
instances where IPRs can and should be limited in the public interest. In the context of an 
unprecedented global pandemic, the revised TRIPS Waiver proposal represe nts a proportionate, 
necessary, targeted and appropriate response to the pandemic.  
4.11.   The COVID -19 pandemic is an unprecedented crisis of our time. In an inter -connected world, 
global solidarity is critical and this necessitates sharing of IP and know -how to enable diversification 
of production of life -saving medical products and technologies.  The WTO will be judged based on its 
ability to deliver a credible response to the COVID -19 pandemic.  
4.12.   The call for a targeted, time -bound TRIPS Waiver is supported by ov er 100 WTO Members, 
as well as former Heads of State across the board, Nobel Laureates and a large spectrum of civil 
society organizations as a proportionate response to the crisis. The TRIPS waiver will not dismantle 
the current system of innovation incen tives. Rather it is a narrow, time -limited waiver aimed only at 
facilitating global production, diversification and access to COVID -19 related products.  
4.13.   We remain flexible to negotiate a targeted and time -limited Waiver and we are ready to work 
with Membe rs to find a balanced outcome that results in diversification of production, especially in 
Africa that imports over 99% of its vaccine needs and achieves the right balance that addresses the 
IP barriers to boost and diversify production and incentivizes re search and innovation.  
4.14.   Patents certainly deserve attention as the manufacturing and supply of one product, especially 
complex biologics like COVID -19 vaccines, is often governed by multiple patents, which may be 
owned by different entities. The Waiver also  includes other aspects such as undisclosed information 
that also deserve attention if we are to unlock production. We need to explore how we can utilize in 
a targeted manner the regulatory data to ramp -up and diversify production.  We believe that data 
gathered during the regulatory approval process, and tacit know -how are also essential for 
manufacturing and producing vaccines.   
4.15.   South Africa believes the TRIPS Waiver is integral to a successful outcome at MC12.  We should 
move beyond the binary between the TRIPS Waiver and the EU Compulsory License proposal. 
Members should have access to all policy tools to boost and diversify production, especially for Africa 
that imports 99% of its vaccine needs.  It will be important to ensure that we align the Facilitator -
led process under Ambassador Walker and the TRIPS Council Chair so that we have a comprehensive 
package that includes the trade related and IP related aspects through the Waiver.  
4.16.   For South Africa and the co -sponsors, the call for a TRIPS Waiver is not an ideological debate 
but a genuine attempt to find a solution that saves people 's lives. We remain optimistic that if we 
engage in a solution -oriented process, we can find a solution that addresses the interests of all within 
the limited time we have.  
4.17.   We bel ieve that approving the TRIPS Waiver for COVID -19-related products is the right thing 
to do, and everyone will benefit from it as sustainable economic recovery is only possible when we 
can curb the spread of the virus everywhere. That can only be achieved when global immunity is 
reached. No one is safe until everyone is.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 17 - 
 
  4.18.   Since the July General Council, we had small group meetings on 22, 24 and 28 June 2021 in 
order to focus on various aspects presented in proposals made to the TRIPS Council. Further small 
group consultations took place on 23 and 29 September and the TRIPS Council convened on 
4 October to adopt the Chair 's oral report.  These sessions have not yielded progress however. 
Despite agreeing to move into text -based negotiations on the revised TRIPS Waiver proposal 
contained in Document (IP/C/W /669Rev 1), a few Members, in practice, have chosen to forego bona 
fide text -based negotiations in favour of asking and repeating a number of clarity -seeking questions. 
This is notwithstanding the fact tha t the vast majority of said questions had been extensively 
addressed in documents IP/C /W/670 , 672, 673 and 674).  
4.19.   In addition to the above -mentioned  reference documents, last week, the co -sponsors 
submitted a compilation of our statements and the answers we  have provided to the various 
questions that Members have posed in lieu of engaging in genuine text-based  negotiations. The said 
document was allocated reference number IP/C/W/684. It is hoped that Members will consult our 
compilation and forego using smal l group consultations as a forum to repeat questions that have 
been extensively addressed.  
4.20.   The co -sponsors have argued that the TRIPS waiver is a necessary, targeted, time -limited 
and proportionate legal measure , directed at addressing intellectual propert y barriers in a direct, 
transparent and efficient fashion, which is consistent with the WTO legal framework. Passing this 
Waiver allows companies the freedom to operate and to produce covered COVID -19 health product s 
and to use health technologies without the fear of infringing another party 's IP rights and the 
attendant threat of litigation. Furthermore, passing a TRIPS Waiver acts as an important political, 
moral and economic lever towards encouraging solutions aimed at global equitable access to COVID -
19 health products and technologies including vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics, which is in the 
wider interest of the global public.  
4.21.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
4.22.   We support Ambassador Sørli's status report made just now. We are disappointed that after 
nearly one year of negotiation the convergence is yet to be achieved. As many Members mentioned, 
intellectual property rights have brought the WTO and the world close r in terms of health and 
development. We have a good opportunity to help increase vaccine supply and address inequity in 
distribution, which could demonstrate the WTO's relevance in this difficult area. With the fast -
approaching MC12, let us work together in a constructive and cooperative manner focusing on what 
is the most urgently needed and what we could deliver in the next 40 days.  
4.23.   In our view, having a vaccine waiver at MC12 and keeping the door open for further discussion 
on other products could be a n option. We know how difficult the task is, but firmly believe that this 
is what we have to achieve if we are committed to maintaining the relevance and credibility of this 
Organization. China always regards vaccines as global public goods and make every effort to ensure 
the accessibility and affordability to developing countries. We will strive to provide 2 billion doses of 
vaccines to other countries throughout the year on top of the USD 100 million donated to the COVAX 
facility. China will donate anothe r 100 million doses of vaccines to developing countries within this 
year. We call upon all Members to strengthen solidarity and enhance cooperation to win this fight, 
which is crucial to the mankind. We also hope that constructive discussion s in Paris by s ome Ministers 
could trigger a real talk on this issue in Geneva.  
4.24.   The representative of Angola  delivered the following statement:  
4.25.   The Angola delegation thanks you, Chair, for your valuable guidance, and we are particularly 
grateful for receiving the highlig hting report from the TRIPS Council Chair. A year passed since, 
India and South Africa' s proposal of 2 October 2020 for a waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS 
Agreement on the prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19. During this period, we  have 
heard the most diverse arguments from countries, organizations, scientists, and other experts on 
the subject. Today we can say that there is a clear majority of WTO members supported by relevant 
scientific data in favour  of the provisional waiving pr oposal. For those still against this extraordinary 
and emergency proposal, Angola, like others before us, would like to stress only two points:  
4.26.   We are not discussing a general waiving of the TRIPS Agreement on health domains in the 
framework of a newly dem anded treaty update. We are debating an urgent, concrete, and WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 18 - 
 
  extraordinary proposal for a once in a lifetime pandemic, with massive trade, economic and social 
global impacts. TRIPS general reform debate should not be used to delay the urgent imperative to  
waive constraints on the provisions that are complicating a global health answer to this health crisis.  
4.27.   The traditional diplomatic concept of 'pragmatism ' has not a meaningful place in this debate. 
There is no pragmatism in the mounting pandemic deaths, i nfections, and negative socio -economic 
consequences at the global level. Existing TRIPS flexibilities are legally very complex and are not 
enough to tackle the pandemic crisis. Simultaneously, a 'pragmatic ' approach leads to a poor 
argument for delaying a needy and urgent solution, thus increasing tragically global consequences. 
Indeed, the suggested 'pragmatic ' approaches on patent pooling, licensing, and knowledge sharing 
platforms have mostly already been made but cannot tackle the pandemic crisis. One f igure is clear: 
while in developed and wealthy countries, more than 70% of the population has received a vaccine 
against COVID -19, over 90% of Africans are still waiting for their first dose. This awful asymmetry 
is not pragmatism, this is a moral indictme nt of the state of our world as the UN  Secretary -General  
duly stated during the 76th UN General Assembly . 
4.28.   We are all aware that the current critical situation of the COVID -19 pandemic is a challenging 
global crisis, especially to the developing countries and LDC s that lack primary health and 
technological resources.  Angola fully supports the statements deliver ed by South Africa and Chad 
on behalf of the LDC  Group , and Tanzania on behalf of the African Group . We invite the Members of 
this Council to consider once again the proposal on a Waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS 
Agreement with immediate and dir ect impact on COVID -19 diagnostics, therapeutics, vaccines, 
medical devices, and personal protective equipment. We hope that this proposal becomes a 
significant item in the coming WTO Ministerial Conference.  
4.29.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
4.30.   We wish to maintain and underscore the urgency for the adoption of the proposal in the TRIPS 
Council. We associate ourselves with the statement that will be delivered by Mauritius on behalf of 
the African Group and Jamaica on behalf of  the ACP  Group . The unequal access to diagnostics, 
therapeutics and vaccines needed to combat COVID -19 due to the huge increase in the supply and 
demand gap , continues to threaten the lives of our citizens. The situation is made worse by the 
TRIPS Agreemen t that continues to unfairly stand in the way of achieving critical public health 
objectives.  
4.31.   The TRIPS constitutes a barrier to ramping up production in developing countries , and existing 
limited and restrictive voluntary licenses provisions have not hel ped the situation. Existing 
flexibilities of the TRIPS Agreement especially in Article 31 and 31bis are not sufficient to address 
the current COVID difficulties given that they are not designed to address the challenges of global 
health emergencies such as  that imposed by the COVID pandemic. The solution to the current COVID 
difficulties lies in rapid outset by every country to affordable diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines 
to combat COVID. This can only be achieved by ramping up production of this produ ct in developing 
countries , and it is for this reason that we call for the adoption of this proposal. We believe that the 
adoption of this proposal will enhance trust within the Membership and credibility of the WTO. Finally, 
we are hopeful that the curren t effort by the WTO particularly through the ongoing consultation by 
Ambassador Walker on WTO Response to Pandemic will have a positive outcome in this regard and 
the TRIPS Council Waiver will be inclusive in the outcome.  
4.32.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
4.33.   I thank you Chair and also thank the TRIP S Council Chair for his report and for his efforts to 
find a solution on th is Agenda item. Pakistan would like to recall all its previous statements on this 
issue in the General C ouncil and the TRIPS Council at its formal, informal, and small group sessions.  
4.34.   One year has officially passed since this waiver was placed on the table with the objective of 
a quick action that would save human lives by providing equitable and affordable access to vaccines 
to everyone across the globe. During this time, while delaying this proposal, opponents often told 
us that the existing system with the Covax facility, and voluntary licenses would be enough to ward 
off any threats and we would soon over come the problems of vaccine shortages. One year on, with 
mortality figures approaching 5 million, and infections getting close to 250 million, the end of the 
pandemic is not in sight. Covax has only delivered 15% of its promised doses for 2021. According WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 19 - 
 
  to UNDP estimates, one in two people have been vaccinated in high income countries as opposed to 
only 1 in 28 in low income countries. Clearly, business -as-usual is working only for the advantage 
of a few in rich countries and for the profits of big pharma  companies.  
4.35.   A small ray of hope for the proposal was created when delegations declared their intention to 
join text -based negotiations. Since then, certain delegations have conveniently gone back on their 
commitment and found it convenient to block the Waiver proposal on one pretext or another. This 
has not only severely delayed an outcome that would have saved precious lives, but has also reduced 
a good faith process to a repetitive, circular discussion.  
4.36.   The cosponsors ' arguments are well known, and well  documented. We have also submitted a 
latest summary of our arguments and detailed examples and evidence in the recent document 
IP/C/W/684. We have also been open to discussing all proposals to find a meaningful solution that 
works. Clearly, routine method s with Covax and voluntary licenses are severely inadequate. 
Compulsory licensing provisions under the TRIPS Agreement are, ironically, too complicated and 
limited to implement in an emergency of this magnitude. The enormity of the challenge is such that 
mere clarifications or reiteration of existing IP or trade policy related provisions would not be 
sufficient. Thus, only a time -bound, temporary waiver from certain TRIPS obligations is the only 
meaningful solution that can address the situation, and it mus t therefore be an integral component 
of any WTO response to the pandemic. Without the waiver, the WTO risks having no tangible 
response to the pandemic which would be disastrous for the organisation.  
4.37.   The representative of Chile delivered the following stat ement:  
4.38.   Our delegation thanks the Chair of the Council for Trade -Related Aspects of Intellectual 
Property Rights (TRIPS) for his report on the status of the talks regarding the proposals submitted 
on this subject, as well as his work to facilitate discussio ns in the search for consensus. Chile 
maintains its position on this matter and we reiterate our appeal to Members to begin by 
implementing and making use of the current flexibilities contained in the TRIPS Agreement in support 
of public policy objectives on health. Now more than ever, favourable conditions exist to domestically 
implement these flexibilities. We believe that the current intellectual property (IP) system already 
has the tools to support the fight against the pandemic.  
4.39.   Furthermore, we must em phasize that a solution to this issue requires a holistic approach, as 
pointed out in previous statements, including the one by South Africa, which is why we have co -
sponsored, together with other Members, the Trade and Health proposal. We are convinced th at this 
Organization can give an integrated response which addresses the challenges of both access to and 
distribution of vaccines at the global level.  
4.40.   The representative of Colombia  delivered the following statement:  
4.41.   I would like to take this opportunity to place on record Colombia's support for the report 
submitted by the Chair of the TRIPS Council, Ambassador Sørli, and thank him for his valuable work 
in leading and facilitating discussions in this Council. I would also like to reiterate Colombia's 
commi tment to a coordinated response from Members to overcome the economic and social crisis 
caused by the COVID -19 pandemic. For my country, this is a topic of the highest importance and 
remains a priority in our international relations.  
4.42.   Colombia thanks the co -sponsors of document IP/C/W/669 and its revision for continuing to 
highlight the importance and urgency of working towards a joint response, and the sponsor of 
document IP/C/W/681 for drafting a focused and pragmatic text. Colombia reaffirms its com mitment 
to continuing to engage constructively in the discussion to seek an effective and collective response 
for the upcoming Ministerial Conference.  
4.43.   The representative of Mauritius, on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
4.44.   We need to be able to move to action quickly and that is not happening. I was looking at the 
data for vaccines and I was interested to see that Portugal today is the country with the highest rate 
of vaccination, about 85% . I was curious to see how they had achi eved it, and the achievement has 
been partly because of the establishment of vaccination production lines at sport centres. It did not WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 20 - 
 
  sound too complicated to me and I was thinking of all the arguments we have about missing 
technology, human capacity and of course knowledge. All this will come but what we need is a 
decision at this point.  
4.45.   I don 't know if we should repeat the arguments about Africa, we have said it so many times, 
how much Africa is lagging behind. And if you were to compare for example Por tugal with 85% I will 
give you a list of the ones with less than 1.6% ; starting with Haiti at 0% ; Democratic Republic of 
Congo 0% ; Chad, Burkina Faso, Benin, South Sudan, Syria, Mali, Papua New Guinea, Yemen, 
Cameroon, Guinea Bissau, Niger, Liberia, Centra l African Republic, all these countries are below 
1.6% and we are tired of hearing this but it is the truth and it does not move away. On the other 
hand, we are very much encouraged, and I heard Ambassador Chenggang  mentioning constructive 
approach at the OECD meeting in Paris, so we are really encouraged that countries are beginning to 
understand better the importance of this.  
4.46.   Pandemics will not go away, they will come back again. This pandemic is not over, it is not 
even lingering, this pandemic is still  in the middle and we need to be able to ensure that beyond 
numbers we also have production centres across the geographical spectrum. The CDC is working to 
try and see how we can do this across Africa,  but we have reached a situation where we do not want 
to depend on one or two persons only for vaccines. In this case, there is a specific issue at hand, so 
we are asking to ramp up this vaccination and we believe that the constructive discussions that are 
now going on could actually lead to a concrete and mea ningful outcome. From the perspective of 
the African Group, all I wish to say is that for us there will be no health response without a response 
on the Waiver.  
4.47.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
4.48.   Thank you very much, first of all, to Ambassador Sørli for his status report of the work on the 
TRIPS Council. I think the report is factual, objective and accurately reflects the developments there. 
The truth is, as we know, despite our many discussions o n these topics, Members are still finding it 
difficult to move toward consensus on these issues. I think we all agree that we need a substantive 
Trade and Health outcome at MC12. One which promotes vaccine production and supports equitable 
vaccine distribu tion for all the reasons that other colleagues have stated.  
4.49.   Where we find ourselves rather at odds is on the most effective way to deliver those outcomes. 
For our own part, we believe that the Intellectual Property system has been a critical enabler of our  
response through this awful pandemic through the extraordinary success in developing the number 
of effective vaccines that we have today. And indeed, the therapeutics and diagnostics which we 
have seen great news on just in the last few days. We do know t hat production is rising to the levels 
that we all aspired to. Production reached 7.5 billion doses last month and we are still on course to 
get to 12 billion by the end of this year. With more manufacturing partnerships being signed, support 
for local pro duction, and we really welcome for example the announcement just last month that 
Pfizer BioNtech signed a deal with Eurofarma in Brazil for COVID -19 vaccine production and scale 
up. 
4.50.   It's also a harsh reality, very eloquently expressed by colleagues around the room this 
morning, that far too many people are still not receiving the vaccines. There is clearly a problem 
with equitable access and distribution and practical issues too about the delivery of those vaccines. 
This is a multifaceted challenge and on t he intellectual property side we are certainly willing to 
consider ways in which IP can be harnessed more effectively, particularly to promote production 
partnerships. We welcome pragmatic suggestions some Members have made in this regard. Finding 
ways to promote voluntary licensing and tech transfer are clearly a vital part in this effort. But the 
solution of vaccine distribution and equity goes well beyond IP, we have discussed this in many fora 
here. It relies on identifying key bottlenecks that companie s are facing in production, distribution 
and administration of vaccines across the whole product chain and acting to remove those 
bottlenecks that bite hardest on that supply chain. That includes action to constrain trade restrictive 
measures, and promote trade facilitation, issues that have been taken up in the Trade and Health 
initiative which colleagues have ready referred to this morning and which we continue to strongly 
support and would like to see reflected at MC12.  
4.51.   A solution on vaccine distribution  and equity also requires proper support for COVAX. We have 
ourselves provided around three quarters of a billion USD to COVAX and are also sharing 100 million WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 21 - 
 
  doses of vaccines from the U nited Kingdom . The U nited Kingdom  is committed to a multifaceted and  
pragmatic response at MC12 and we will work hard with colleagues to achieve that outcome.  
4.52.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
4.53.   On behalf of the co -sponsors , I welcome Malaysia as our newest co -sponsor taking the total 
number of s ponsors to 64. Incidentally, this proposal was submitted on Mahatma Gandhi 's Birth 
anniversary on 2  October, last year.  We have lost a whole year and over 5 million lives while 
discussing this proposal. It is disappointing , to say the least , that even on s uch a critical, urgent and 
extraordinary issue , despite commitments to engage in text -based negotiation s, all we have done 
until now is debate and discuss the issue, thanks to a few Members. Although we have held several 
rounds of small group meetings, owi ng to lack of substantive engagement by a few Members , 
valuable time has been wasted without an outcome. While we have heard many delegations extolling 
the spirit of compromise, the need to be practical and pragmatic to be able to deliver in their areas 
of interest such values seem to be unwarranted in the TRIPS Waiver negotiations.  
4.54.   A few Members have stated that they do not view Waiver as a response to enhancing supplies , 
thereby increasing accessibility and affordability of vaccines, therapeutics and dia gnostics required 
to combat C OVID -19. They have repeatedly claimed that existing flexibilities will deliver , but the 
current situation clearly reveals that these flexibilities have not delivered equitable access at 
affordable prices.   
4.55.   Problems surrounding equitable access and affordability of these vaccines would continue to 
persist. As the countries with higher income level crowd out most of the production, add to that their 
need for boosters, annual vaccinations and vaccination for children , the current system will fall way 
short of the required enhanced needs.  Protecting one country has its own limits when others remain 
unprotected , therefore it becomes imperative to prioritize people who have not yet received their 
first dose and to achieve t his we have to respond to lack of availability as well as accessibility and 
affordability.  With emerging new and deadlier variants, the only way to ensure that today 's vaccines 
remain effective is to get the world vaccinated as soon as possible. The bigger  the pool of infected 
people , the higher risk of virus mutations and high chances of the vaccines becoming ineffective.  
Recent studies have shown that though there may be breakthrough infections amongst the 
vaccinated population, the percentage of serious illness resulting in hospitalization and fatality has 
certainly reduced amongst vaccinated populations.   
4.56.   The recent UNCTAD Trade and Development report has found that developing countries will, 
by 2025, be as much as USD 8 trillion poorer because of the co ronavirus crisis, and the burden of 
delayed vaccination estimated at USD 2,3 trillion in terms of lost income will be borne mostly by 
developing countries. In light of such alarming data, it is disheartening to see how the interest of a 
majority has been c onveniently side -lined. This differentiated approach to combat the pandemic is 
bound to fail. We must , as an organization,  be willing to deliver on issues within our mandate that 
aim to alleviate the problems of the most vulnerable. Thus, it is paramount t o incorporate the Waiver 
proposal into the WTO 's response package being deliberated upon and we must ensure this is 
achieved to ensure a successful MC12.  
4.57.   The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
4.58.   Malaysia would like to thank Ambass ador Dagfinn Sørli for his leadership in the TRIP S Council 
and for the report delivered, which represents the factual outcome on the state of play in the text -
based negotiations.  Malaysia would like to join other Members in highlighting the common goal of 
providing timely and equitable access to affordable vaccines and medicines for all. We commend the 
Director -General for her leadership in spearheading the WTO initiatives towards ensuring equitable 
and affordable access to vaccines.  
4.59.   As of 1 October 2021, t he statistics have shown that almost 5 million people have lost their 
lives due to COVID -19. In Malaysia, we have lost nearly 27,000 people due to this pandemic, which 
has prolonged for nearly two years.  Having this in mind, we wish to reiterate the import ance of 
timely access to affordable diagnostics, therapeutics, vaccines, and other medical products in order 
to enable us to effectively contain the spread of COVID -19. The fight against this global pandemic 
requires 'creative approaches beyond the norm '.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 22 - 
 
  4.60.   During the TRIPS Council meeting, my delegation shared our experience in utilizing the TRIPS 
flexibility on compulsory licensing provision twice, firstly, for the importation of HIV medication in 
2003, and secondly in 2017, for the treatment of Hepatitis C. In our view, compulsory licensing 
alone is inadequate to address the urgency of the pandemic and the remaining divide between the 
developed and developing members in the access to vaccines.  
4.61.   We remain cognisant of the role of intellectual property rights  in research and development. 
Nonetheless, the urgency of addressing life -threatening pandemic situations warrants more bold and 
decisive interventions to save lives including through the waiving of intellectual property rights. We 
view that a TRIPS Waiver  can act as an important demonstration of global solidarity and a huge 
contribution on the part of the WTO in responding to the pandemic. Therefore, we strongly encourage 
Members to engage constructively on the TRIPS Waiver proposal with the aim of achievi ng a common 
landing zone towards a favourable outcome at the MC12.  
4.62.   The representative of Vanuatu, on behalf of the Pacific Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
4.63.   We support the statement to be made by the ACP Group. The Pacific Group considers this 
matter as an integral outcome for MC12 and for the simple reason that human lives matter. Human 
lives matter now, human lives matter tomorrow. New waves of infections ar e continuing, including 
in some countries that have brought COVID -19 under control, while many of us are still struggling 
from the previous waves of the pandemic. Infections are still rising and so are deaths, while vaccines 
shortages continue in developin g countries and in poor countries. Vaccine inequity cannot continue, 
we must place people at the centre of the solutions. The TRIPS Waiver which has been proposed 
and is under discussion for so long, provides an effective solution to scale up supplies of v accines. 
The Pacific Group supports therefore urgent work in the TRIPS Council and not only on text -based 
discussions , but with Members to engage constructively, in good faith, and in solution seeking mode , 
so that an agreement on outcome s can be reached w ell before MC12. We also believe this should 
form part of an overall package of the WTO COVID -19 responses.  
4.64.   The representative of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
4.65.   Australia is committed to delivering a positive, consensus driven outcome at MC12  that sends 
a powerful message of global solidarity and of the WTO 's ability to respond to a major global crisis.  
Australia also recognises the importance of affirming the right for all WTO Members to overcome 
any intellectual property barriers that emerge  in responding to COVID -19.  
4.66.   We are concerned that some of the views repeatedly expressed in the TRIPS Council are 
putting at risk our ability to achieve consensus . As many others have noted, it is very unfortunate 
that after 12 months of debate, there rem ain significant disagreements between Members about the 
role of intellectual property in responding to COVID -19. We therefore call on all Members to engage 
with a genuine spirit of compromise so that we can find common ground and deliver a positive 
outcome . 
4.67.   The representative of Jamaica, on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following statement:  
4.68.   The ACP Group is particularly pleased that the proponents have been exercising flexibility and 
that non proponents are being constructive in the meetings. We be lieve that the proposal should 
continue to be prioritized in the work programme of the TRIPS Council and we call for the 
continuation of discussions on the issue in various formats deemed necessary by WTO Members. We 
believe that it is important for us to have an outcome on this matter by MC12. An Agreement on a 
waiver that accommodates the interests and addresses the concerns of all WTO Members is an 
important component of global efforts to addressing the pressing issue of inadequate and lack of 
access of two vaccines and other items for the prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19, 
particularly in developing countries and LDCs.  
4.69.   The ACP Group reiterates its endorsement of the genuine public health objectives of the 
proposal , and we support proponents in their bid to contribute to international initiatives to ensure 
that our people have affordable access to medicines, vaccines and other COVID -related items. We 
believe that vaccination is the most durable solution to contain th e virus and therefore facilitating 
access, especially by developing countries and LDCs should be our priority. Our fiscal targets have WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 23 - 
 
  been dislocated due to the impact of the pandemic and our health care systems and economies are 
facing unprecedented chal lenges with no light at the end of the tunnel. We continue to impress upon 
the WTO's Membership that no Member is safe until all Members are , and COVID induced economic 
and social challenges in one Member affect other Members.  
4.70.   The ACP Group thanks the co -sponsors for their commitment and takes this opportunity to 
invite other Members to continue their constructive engagement, and in a collaborative manner with 
a view to finding a landing zone that works for all Members. The health and lives of people shoul d 
always be our priority and the ACP Group is confident that WTO Members are capable of delivering 
for an d on behalf of our people in these most difficult times.   
4.71.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
4.72.   We hesitate to int ervene since this is a procedural agenda item. Members have already agreed 
by consensus to the report. However, given the extensive discussions, we would like to make the 
following points. We in the United States are doing all we can to ensure everyone, bo th at home and 
around the world, has access to safe and effective vaccines because more vaccinations are how we 
end this pandemic. We have committed to donate over 1.1 billion doses to date. We have already 
shipped nearly 160 million doses to 100 countries  – donating more vaccines than all other countries 
combined – for free and with zero strings attached, with millions more shipping each day. The United 
States has stated its support for a waiver of intellectual property protections for COVID -19 vaccines. 
We also recognize the consensus -based nature of the WTO and the complexity of the issues involved. 
With MC12 coming up in less than 2 months, we are at a critical juncture. We remain committed to 
engaging with WTO Members to find a way forward that all Memb ers can support. However, unless 
Members are able to make some real compromises, we worry that there may be the possibility of 
no outcome – which would be extremely regretful. It is time for the WTO to come together and 
deliver the constructive and practic al outcome that the world needs.  
4.73.   The representative of Tunisia  delivered the following statement:  
4.74.   We thank the Chair of the Council for Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights 
(TRIPS) for his status report and his highly appreciated efforts.  We believe that after a year of 
discussing the initiative for a waiver, submitted by its proponents, everything has been said, 
including the arguments and assurances necessary to convince certain Members wh o remain 
sceptical about the vital objective of th is initiative, not to mention the unprecedented aspirations of 
the international community and civil society as to a convincing decision at the WTO.  
4.75.   The time to be convincing as to the usefulness of the initiative or to defend the rules or even 
to call int o question the effectiveness of international mechanisms has ended. Rather, the time has 
come to show real international solidarity.  We are seriously concerned that if certain Ministers at 
MC12 point out delays in their vaccination campaigns or the low vac cination rates in their countries 
while other Members are already administrating booster shots in theirs, the outcomes of the whole 
Conference will be compromised.  
4.76.   My delegation can, in this respect, confirm the effectiveness of solidarity. Tunisia's healt hcare 
system was on the brink of collapse two months ago due to recurring waves of the pandemic and a 
very high death rate, but our country succeeded in a matter of weeks – thanks to an outpouring of 
solidarity from friends and brothers across our borders,  combined with a more responsive COVAX 
mechanism – to correct the situation and curb the spread of COVID -19 by reaching a vaccination 
rate of nearly 50%.  
4.77.   In this regard, the proposed waiver under discussion serves as a reminder of the foundations 
of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, prioritizing the protection of 
global health and the promotion of access to medicines for all. The Members of the WTO have a duty 
to show tangible solidarity, which is necessary in these exceptional circumstances.  
4.78.   The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement:  
4.79.   Norway has not been convinced that the TRIPS Waiver proposed by India and South Africa 
would be an efficient tool in the fight against the pandemic. On the other hand, we agree that we 
must ensure that intellectual property rights do not constitute a barrier to solving the current or WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 24 - 
 
  future health crisis. Norway would like to appeal to all parties to search for a common ground as a 
basis for pragmatic comprom ise that can achieve a consensus. We welcome the signals of flexibility 
heard from South Africa today. We look forward to continuing our deliberations within the framework 
of the TRIPS Council.  
4.80.   The representative of the Central African Republic  delivered the following statement:  
4.81.   We noted in the report that there have been some disagreements, which mean s that we may 
not be able to hope for an agreement on a possible waiver. The Central African Republic supports 
the statement made by the African Gr oup, the ACP Group and the LDC Group on this matter . Lifting 
trade restrictions on the implementation of trade facilitation is not enough to ensure that we have 
an effective and efficient response from the WTO to this pandemic. In addition to these trade 
measures, we need this waiver , which will allow the populations who have been decimated by this 
pandemic to have access to vaccines . That is why the Central African Republic would like to call for 
global solidarity and for international cooperation in order  to provide this agreement no matter what 
form the waiver may take, but which  is so important for LDCs and developing countries. The 
important thing is to have access to these vaccines, which will allow us to mitigate the suffering of 
our populations in these countries.  
4.82.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
4.83.   My delegation thanks the TRIPS Chair for his report on the issue today. We have emphasised 
many times before that Members should engage in text -based discus sion on this submission as soon 
as possible. The Waiver proposal is one year old. In the meantime, the COVID -19 pandemic 
continues to ravage our lives and livelihood. It has already done enough damage to developing 
countries , and LDCs  are the hardest hit.  People are waiting for vaccines. The production of vaccine s 
cannot meet the supply and demand. The current system is not functioning well to facilitate adequate 
production and supply of the vaccine and therapeutic , and their affordable and equitable access  all 
over the world.  
4.84.   Many delegations have already pointed out to vaccine inequality, vaccine nationalism, and 
export restriction s. The high-income  countries that make up 16% of the world population have pre -
booked the majority of the vaccines till 2025. On the other hand, a majority of the population in 
developing countries and particularly LDCs are left in uncertainty from the affordable and timely 
access of the vaccine. We all are aware that the production of vaccine s against COVID -19 is highly 
concentr ated in a few countries. Concentrated production leads to monopolistic control of production, 
supply and prices of vaccines. This situation contributes to inequitable and unaffordable access.  On 
the other hand, the issue is not just about one round of vacc ination. For equitable access, it has to 
be timely and sustainable over time. As it appears, supply constraints will persist beyond 2021 as 
teenagers and children need  to be vaccinated and multiple booster doses are required. Therefore, 
there is an urgent need to expand manufacturing globally and to diversify supply, for vaccines, 
therapeutics and other medical products needed in 2021 and beyond. The TRIPS Council 's objective 
on this specific discussion, under this temporary Waiver proposal, should be to ov ercome barriers to 
achieve equitable and timely access.  
4.85.   We welcome any initiative by Members that aims to address the challenges of unhindered and 
adequate supply of vaccines, therapeutics and medical equipment for the treatment of COVID -19. 
Every proposa l should be understood on its own merit. We also believe that our proposals should 
complement each other. None of our initiatives should slow down our common goal that aims to 
scale up the production of COVID -19 specific vaccines and therapeutic s and diver sify their 
distribution globally. If we continue to spend our time only on the legality and legitimacy of the 
proposals and not on the substance, we are not doing justice to the severity of the public health 
crisis.  And time is of the essence. We cannot su ccumb to commercial interest of a few jeopardising 
the lives of millions.  On this issue, my delegation looks forward to engaging constructively with 
Members.  
4.86.   The representative of Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
4.87.   I thank Ambassador S ørli for the status report, which I find reflecting in an objective manner 
the actual discussions undertaken at the TRIPS Council.  I appreciate his continuous efforts to keep 
this process inclusive and transparent.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 25 - 
 
  4.88.    Like others, my delegation i s of the view that any agreement, if reached, on IP -related issues 
at the TRIPS Council should serve eventually as part of the broader package of the WTO 's response 
to the pandemic.  However, in spite of the current difficulty and ensuing lack of progress i n securing 
the convergence of opinions on IP -related issues, Members are still expected to continue with the 
Facilitator -led process of preparing the overall package of trade and health, which is essential for 
MC12.  Korea hopes that Members continue to dis cuss the IP related proposals in an open and 
constructive manner and take the pragmatic and practical approach so as to find a solution in time.  
4.89.   The representative of Nepal  delivered the following statement:  
4.90.   I thank the Chair of the TRIPS Council for his s tatus report and also appreciate his skilful 
leadership in engaging members for fruitful discussions in this agenda. My delegation wishes to 
associate with the statement delivered by Chad on behalf of the LDC group and South Africa and 
India on behalf of t he proponents.  
4.91.   It has be en a year since this proposal submitted to the TRIPS Council. More than 3.6 million 
lives were lost due to COVID -19 pandemic since the submission of the proposal, but we have not 
been able to deliver any concrete result. A large part of the Membership is in favour of concluding 
text-based negotiation based on the revised proposal. Nepal is in favour of the proposal since the 
beginning , and now strongly support as a proponent of the proposal to successfully conclude and 
deliver with a view to saving millions of lives across the globe.  
4.92.   The representative of Turkey  delivered the following statement:  
4.93.   We would like to join other members in expressing our support to the status report presented 
by TRIPS Council Chair, Ambassador S ørli. We appreciate his leadership and efforts. The question 
on how to construct the WTO's contribution to the global fight against COVID -19 is very crucial for 
all of us. That is why we highly appreciate our discussions at the TRIPS Council and other WTO 
bodies. We all agree on the need for affordable and rapid supply of vaccines.  
4.94.   There are two different approaches at the TRIPS Council for delivering a swift response to 
possible IP -related issues , and Members continue to be divided regarding the advantages  of these 
two different proposals. We believe that both have their own merits and they are not necessarily 
alternatives to each other.  We should aim for a meaningful, timely and effective outcome on this 
matter. For this, we believe that a constructive eng agement and a result -oriented approach is 
needed. It is high time to try to bridge the gaps and find a landing zone.  
4.95.   The representative of Zimbabwe  delivered the following statement:  
4.96.   We align ourselves with the statements delivered by Mauritius and South Africa on behalf of 
the Africa Group and the co -sponsors of the TRIPS waiver, respectively. We thank the Chair of the 
TRIPS Council for the good work he is doing and the status report he provided. As we take the floor 
today, Zimbabwe is currently emerging from the tragic impact of three waves of C OVID -19 infections 
and deaths, the most recent episode was driven by a major upsurge in Delta variant cases. The 
downward trend has largely been driven by the steady implementation of our national vaccination 
roll-out programme and the sourcing of vaccines for our people from Russia, China, and India.  That 
notwithstanding, we have a great deal of ground to cover if we are to attain our target of 60% of 
our population being fully vaccinated before the end of 2021.  
4.97.   As we all know, global vaccine shortages, as well as uneven and inequitable distribution, are 
partly attributed to manufacturing capacity constraints, vaccine nationalism, vaccine export 
restrictions and a range of other factors. The proposed waiver from ce rtain provisions of the TRIPS 
Agreement for the prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19 remains one of the most 
obvious remedies towards addressing those shortages, and towards rapidly increasing 
manufacturing capacity, wherever possible and prac tical, thereby ensuring enhanced supply and 
with it, enhanced safe, equitable, and timely access to COVID -19 vaccines and therapeutics.  
4.98.   As co -sponsors we have shown great flexibility and accommodation as evidenced by our 
revised proposal in document IP/C/ W/669/Rev.1. which was issued on 21 May 2021. We continue 
to engage in various formats, including informal , small  group s, and open -ended meetings on the 
duration, scope, and implementation of the proposal on a waiver. However, we bemoan the painfully WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 26 - 
 
  slow pace of discussions. We believe that it would send a positive message to the world if Members 
were able to agree on the waiver proposal in time for MC12.  
4.99.   We noted the proposal by the European Union on a proposed draft General Council declaration 
on the TRI PS Agreement and Public Health in the circumstances of a pandemic, issued and circulated 
in IP/C/W/681. This proposal is by no means a substitute for the waiver proposal and should be 
discussed in parallel to the waiver proposal. We have expressed our conc erns and comments on this 
proposal and pointed out its shortcomings in addressing inequitable vaccine distribution, shortages 
and access.  As we reach closer to MC12, in the next few months, Member s need to be cognizant of 
the urgency involved, and we empha size the need for both collaboration and flexibility in the search 
for a practical way forward  
4.100.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
4.101.   We want to thank the chair of the TRIPS Council, Ambassador S ørli, for his factual report on 
the state of negotiations regarding the proposal for a waiver to the TRIPS Agreement and other 
Members for their proposals.  We share Ambassador S ørli's assessment that disagreement persists 
on fundamental questions of the discussions  and no consensus was possible so far. We recall that a 
decision in this item will necessarily require a certain degree of compromise from all parties involved.  
4.102.   Brazil remains committed to a result in trade and health for MC12 that includes intellectual 
property. We have been e ngaging constructively with the discussions in the TRIPS Council and 
offered possible landing zones for a result in IP. We specifically stated our willingness to discuss 
targeted reforms of the TRIPS Agreement that would facilitate the use of TRIPS flexibi lities.  We 
continue to be open to discussing other compromise solutions Members might have.  
4.103.   We welcome recent developments that have led to more partnerships and the increased 
productive capacity announced in developing countries. Members and the private sector should 
continue to develop creative and long -term solutions to address the current imbalance in productive 
capacity - one of the reasons of the imbalances in world vaccination rates.  
4.104.   As this delegation has reiterated on several occasions, Brazil wan ts solutions that empower 
all Members in their response to the challenges we are currently facing. Further improving and 
clarifying the flexibilities within the IP system to deal with health crises is one among other important 
contribution the multilateral  trading system could offer to deal with this and future pandemics.  You 
can count on our engagement to continue to work to that end in the months ahead.  
4.105.   The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
4.106.   At the outset we would like to associate ourselves with the statement made by Mauritius on 
behalf of the African Group and by South Africa and India on behalf of the TRIPS waiver co -sponsors ; 
and we would like to thank the Chair of the TRIP S Council for his report today and his sincere efforts 
in steering the discussions in the TRIP S Council.  
4.107.   We are all facing unprecedented challenges and it is clear that the current flexibilities in the 
TRIPS Agreement and the global initiatives to provide vaccines to those in need are not enough to 
help in scaling up production and achieving the equitable distribution of vaccines in order to put an 
end to the pandemic. According to the WHO , more than 50 countries — many of which are in Africa 
— missed the target to vaccinate 10% of their residents by Se ptember 2021 , and the overall 
vaccination rate in Africa remains under 4% . 
4.108.   As the discussions continue in the TRIPS Council , the vaccine inequity is fuelling  this 
pandemic and the infection rate and death toll are increasing in many parts of the world espe cially 
in low income countries. We also risk that new variants will continue to emerge and allow the 
negative impact of the pandemic on the global economy to deepen. We believe that the co -sponsors 
of the Waiver proposal have already shown the needed flexi bility in the discussions and we call on 
all members to continue to engage constructively in solution -oriented mode that will enable us at 
the end to ramp up the production of vaccines and address the vaccine inequity.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 27 - 
 
  4.109.   The representative of Maldives  delivered the following statement:  
4.110.   In May this year, the WHO set a global goal to fully vaccinate 10% of every countries' 
population by 30 December 2021. We are sad to note that only 15 African countries have been able 
to fully vaccinate 10% of their population against COVID -19 and almost 9 0% of high -income 
countries have met this target. These figures show why we need to redouble our efforts to overcome 
the challenges related to vaccine equity. To address the global supply shortage and to promote 
equitable access , we need to urgently addres s the intellectual property challenges. In this regard, 
an exceptional waiver for certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the prevention, containment 
and treatment of COVID -19 will assist in scaling up production and enhance equitable and timely 
access to affordable medical products, including vaccines and medicines for all. Maldives, as a co -
sponsor of this exceptional waiver , is hopeful that all WTO Members will work together in global 
solidarity and agreeing on moving forward with text -based negoti ations with the aim of providing 
universal access to COVID -19 vaccines, testing, treatments and other products to control the 
pandemic and to reach sustainable development goals. In this regard, I would like to echo previous 
speakers in calling for acceler ated efforts to achieve substantive progress through textual 
discussions and reaching a positive outcome with regard to the proposed waiver in the interest of 
time. 
4.111.   The representative of Sri Lanka  delivered the following statement:  
4.112.   Sri Lanka also wishes to  join previous delegations who commended the Chair of the TRIPS 
Council on his efforts, and echo their disappointment that Members have not been able to find a 
solution from the WTO context to the current severe shortages of vaccines and other related 
medicines required for treating severely ill patients , through the proposed waiver as the key 
deliverable mode for durable and reliable solutions.  
4.113.   The situation related to COVID -19 in small countries is complex and diverse. They face 
different challenges , mostly disadvantages which can be identified as regards their exposure to the 
virus and their capacity for response. Small countries are more exposed. Due to the increasing ease 
and affordability of air travel and mobility of people, transmission of airborne,  food-borne and vector -
borne infectious diseases have become an important public health issue.  As a country which does 
not have manufacturing capacity, Sri Lanka is naturally compelled to secure the vaccines and other 
related medicines for treating severel y ill patients from the global supplies.  
4.114.   While there is no universally agreed level, considering the emergence of new variants, many 
experts agree that a country should vaccinate around 80% of its population to achieve herd immunity 
against COVID -19. This  translates to 17.5 million Sri Lankans.  Thanks to the supplies provided 
through the COV AX initiative, generous bilateral donations in kind and in funds and procured at cost, 
Sri Lanka has achiev ed certain milestones in the inoculation of its population. 5 2% of the population 
have receiv ed both doses and around 80% at least one dose. Th is success is due the availability of 
the required amount of vaccines, though they were received quite late due to the severe shortages 
of supplies , prompting the government to impose long time closures to contain the spread of delta 
variant. Could we be happy with such good outcomes achieved by Sri Lanka, when the world 
populations in certain parts are still struggling to ensure the supplies ?  
4.115.    Let me share a classical exampl e of another medicine which has the potential of getting the 
severely ill covid -19 patients out of danger. The ACTEMRA/ROACTEMRA (TOCILIZUMAB) injection 
has been authorized in its emergency use on very critical hospitalised COVID -19 patients . Due to 
the worsening situation of the C OVID -19 pandemic in the country and the high rate of resultant 
deaths , TOCILIZUMAB has also been included in the WHO Therapeutics and COVID -19 living 
guideline s, based on the body of evidence.  
4.116.   In this respect, it is pertine nt to mention that Sri Lanka, being a lower -middle income 
country, not having its own robust domestic pharmaceutical industry, was compelled to depend 
solely on imports.  Sri Lanka reported more than 4,000 daily COVID -19 positive cases, and out of 
that, nea rly 2,000 cases were being hospitalized daily and the prevalence of critical or life threatening 
situations of the positive COVID -19 cases are also drastically increasing at the moment. Out of the 
hospitalized cases, nearly 70 - 80% of the cases are oxygen  dependent and a large portion of that 
is above 50 years of age. Almost all of the above 50 years age patients require ICU admission care. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 28 - 
 
  Accordingly, TOCILIZUMAB injection is widely used to save the lives of ICU admitted and oxygen 
dependent patients.  
4.117.   In pursuit of taking every effort to minimize the daily increasing death rate, Sri Lankan 
Government Hospitals required a minimum of 20 vials of TOCILIZUMAB 400 mg injection per day. 
The quantities ordered by State Pharmaceuticals Corporation of Sri Lanka we re, therefore, 
commensurate with this actual ground situation. But after making valiant efforts, we failed to secure 
the required quantities which resulted in going up the death rate. There can be many empirical 
evidence  to show on an array of related medi cines. Recently we heard, there are unusual aftereffects  
that are detected on many COVID -19 patients , including children.  
4.118.   As the waiver proposal of IP/C/W/669/ Rev.1 offers an array of solutions to unlock the key 
issues hindering equal access, we strongly believe that is the best outcome we can deliver at MC12, 
if we are serious about proving that the WTO is capable of delivering outcomes when mankind needs 
it mostly. It will therefore be important that a meaningful outcome on the COVID -19 TRIPS Waiver 
proposal must be agreed before MC12. We appeal to those countries to demonstrate their good faith 
solidarity and engage meaningfully in the process to arrive at good and workable solutions.   
4.119.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following stat ement:  
4.120.   The European Union would first like to thank Ambassador S ørli for his report and for his 
efforts in guiding and steering the discussions in the TRIPS Council. The European Union is strongly 
committed to achieving our common goal  to continue ramping up production, to share COVID -19 
vaccines and medicines more widely and faster, and to ensure equitable access to these products 
for low - and middle -income countries.  
4.121.   Intellectual property -related issues are a part of the trade response to the pandemic. Th e 
intellectual property system has played a key role in the development of COVID -19 vaccines and 
medicines and can play an enabling role in deploying existing capacity or creating new capacity for 
the production of COVID -19 vaccines and medicines. The Euro pean Union believes that it is possible 
to enhance this role of the IP system while at the same time maintaining the protection required for 
incentivising technology transfer and investment in innovation, so that we can fight against new 
strains of COVID -19 and any future diseases. It is to this end that the European Union has put 
forward a proposal on the clarification and facilitation of the use of compulsory licensing system.  
4.122.   The European Union appreciated the possibility provided by the informal meeting s of the 
TRIPS Council and small group meetings to discuss the issues of scope and implementation of the 
revised waiver proposal and the EU proposal.  The discussions have been helpful to understand the 
positions of various delegations and to identify impor tant points of convergence. The results are 
encouraging in our view.  
4.123.   The European Union proposal is meant to clear any doubts that persist about the use of the 
IP system and to indicate ways in which the compulsory licensing system can be used in a fast an d 
simple manner that is fully adapted to the challenges of the pandemic and to the need to support 
the local production on the needed vaccines, medicines and diagnostics.  
4.124.   We encourage all WTO Members to try to find agreement on the basis of the points of 
convergence identified in our discussions. We need a solution that is pragmatic, targeted and 
effective in responding to the current needs , while keeping intact the necessary incentives for 
innovation. It is through the targeted approach that we believe we can advance in our discussions 
on the intellectual property element of the WTO response to the COVID -19 pandemic and also pave 
the way for advancing on the other parts of the needed comprehensive approach.  
4.125.   We are committed to continue constructively engagi ng in the discussions in the TRIPS 
Council and in the small group consultations. In addition, we are ready to consider any other proposal 
that may contribute to our common goals.  Finally, we would like to emphasise that the intellectual 
property aspects ar e only a part of the multi -pronged approach proposed by the European Union. 
And we call on all Members to engage in discussions on all elements of this approach as only this 
way we will be able to adequately respond to the current crisis.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 29 - 
 
  4.126.   The representative of Namibia  delivered the following statement:  
4.127.   We appreciate the effort by South Africa and India on behalf of the co -sponsor s for the 
constant position in responding positively and addressing concerns of other Members. Namibia fully 
supports  the statement delivered by Mauritius on behalf of the African Group. The pandemic won't 
end soon until such time when all countries have secured access to safe, affordable, effective and 
quality COVID -19 vaccines and other therapeutics for the treatment a nd containment of COVID -19 
the flexibilities are provided under the Marrakesh Agreement establishing the WTO , specifically the 
flexibility to grant a waiver under Article IX :3. Therefore, we believe that the WTO has an important 
role to play in saving huma nity. Therefore, we need to be sincere and work in solidarity for a 
pragmatic solution to prevent the further spread of the COVID -19 virus. It is against this backdrop 
that we fully support a conclusion of the waiver on this subject matter and move towards  text-based 
negotiation.  
4.128.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:   
4.129.   Indonesia would like to thank the Chair of the TRIPS Council for his oral report which reflects 
how unfortunate the current state of play of the negotiation  is. We would like to associate ourselves 
with the statements made by South Africa and India on behalf of the co -sponsors. It is without doubt 
that COVID -19 is now the greatest and most immediate challenge to the world while part of the 
world's countries is makin g good progress vaccinating their citizens against COVID -19. Most low- 
and middle -income  countries are still struggling to get enough doses just to protect the health of 
front line workers as well as their most vulnerable. Indeed, 66% of people in high inc ome countries 
have so far received at least one shot of COVID -19 vaccines, compared to 2% of people in low -
income countries. It is distressing that 80% of the vaccines have gone to high - and upper middle -
income countries while low -income countries have rec eived less than 1% of the vaccines. Nineteen 
months into the pandemic we have witnessed the death of over 4.8 million people. Like others , we 
believe that the current situation with persisting vaccine inequity exacerbated by the problems with 
bottlenecks a nd supply chain disruption shows how inadequate the current system is in resolving 
the problem. It is clear that a comprehensive and holistic approach is needed and everyone include 
in this organization must do their part. We must make the call including t hose from the Director 
General of the WHO, that the TRIPS waiver is needed as part of the solution to combat COVID -19. 
With less than two months left before MC12 we need to speed up our work and show good faith in 
resolving this issue. In this regard, we s hould move past  conceptual discussions and repeating the 
same questions and answers. Indonesia echoes what other delegations have said and urge the TRIPS 
Council to move towards a real text -based negotiation of the TRIPS waiver.  
4.130.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
4.131.   We welcome the tireless efforts by the Chair of the TRIPS Council in order to progress our 
discussions on the critical issue of access to COVID -19 vaccines. We would like to thank all Members 
for their engagement during this global crisis which requires an urgent and effective response. We 
have heard this many times from previous speakers. I would add that we must ensure that 
intellectual property , which is an im portant lever , does not constitute a roadblock. Indeed, as many 
Members have remarked, a year has already gone by since the initial proposal for a waiver was put 
forward by India and South Africa.  This is why we call all Members to now conclude negotiation s in 
time for MC12. The discussions that we had this morning are in some ways a prolongation of all of 
the work of Ambassador Sørli and also an extension of the highly interesting discussions we had a 
few days ago at the OECD in Paris. We do not think ther e should be dogmatic or ideological issue 
and we welcome the position of flexibility demonstrated by South Africa this morning. The status 
quo does not suit anyone.  
4.132.   The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement:  
4.133.   I also thank Ambassador S ørli for his tireless efforts in facilitating the discussion on the 
Waiver. Like others, this is a very important issue for us, we would like to see the results of the 
issue on the WTO responses to the pandemic being included in MC12. Having said that, I r ecognize 
the difficulties that Members have in discussing these very complicated issues. From our experience, 
I would like to share a few numbers . The death toll from COVID -19 in Thailand totalled only about 
17,418 people which is not a lot compared to oth ers. We have had infection of 1.68 million people 
out of about 68 million population, but th ese relatively low figures have come at a very severe WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 30 - 
 
  economic cost because we achieved this out of a very, I would say, hardcore lockdown . We sealed 
off the countr y from international trade , we sealed a lot of domestic activities and therefore this year 
we sadly may have to experience little economic growth.  
4.134.   Our experience in vaccinating our population is also very slow . Right now we have reached 
only about 33% of fully vaccinated people , and with  a first dose 51% of the population . This, I would 
say, is not very low but it is not very high, it is relatively low. Our vaccination is also coming despite 
the fact that Thailand has vaccine manufacturing in the countr y, we have licensing agreements with 
some vaccine producers from other countries, we also have been beneficiaries of donation, our 
vaccines are from our friends around the world. So, from our experience here we think that access 
to vaccine is the most impo rtant issue right now for Thailand. Many people in the country would 
hesitate to go to fully relaxing, going back to normal, without enough vaccines, so for us the access 
to vaccines is the number one priority.  
4.135.   Having said this about our experience, let me  touch upon the discussion in the WTO a little 
bit. Because of what has been unfolding in our country, we think that access to vaccines should be 
given priority , and we would prefer to have discussion s in the next phase in the WTO focus mainly 
on vaccine i ssues . Given the limited time we have , Thailand thinks that other therapeutics  and 
supplies of some other medical products can be discussed later. On the issue of the waiver, from 
our view, we do not think that either CL or waiver is the only answer for va ccines. Our viewpoint is 
that the whole pandemic response must be looked at from a holistic approach .  
4.136.   My last point is that I have heard the views from both sides of the discussion, we have heard 
developed countries, we have heard South Africa, India and other developing countries positions . 
We are sympathetic and understanding of everybody , but we hope that there will be a common 
landing zone found soon on this important matter. The waiver and intellectual property are legal 
vehicles for the treatment of the pandemic, we need to look at some other things too but right now 
let's try to focus on intellectual property related to vaccines first , so we can also look at other related 
products and measures at a later stage, that is our view at the moment. I wish us all good luck in 
finding solution for this important matter.  
4.137.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
4.138.   Switzerland thanks the Chair of the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) 
Council for his status report. The report rightly notes that Members share the common goal of 
ensuring global, equitable and timely access to COVD -19 vaccines and medicines. However, 
Members do not agree on the usefulness of a waiver. My delegation considers that a waiver would 
be counterpr oductive and would not help us achieve this common goal.  
4.139.   The situation is constantly changing. Thanks to a great number of partnerships, facilitated 
by intellectual property protection, the pharmaceutical industry has increased its production 
exponentially . These efforts and partnerships, which involve numerous technology transfers, could 
be jeopardised by the absence of appropriate intellectual property protection. I would like to add 
that this year has not been wasted. 12 billion vaccines will be produced  to treat COVID -19 alone. 
Let us not forget that before the pandemic, vaccine manufacturing capacity for the treatment of all 
relevant diseases was 5 billion units. Excess production is expected for the next year, to the extent 
that a major pharmaceutical company has abandoned its plans to market a high -performing vaccine.  
4.140.   However, we are still facing serious difficulties. Today, the most acute problems are related 
to malfunctioning distribution channels. Vaccines do not save lives. Vaccination does. We mus t 
therefore address distribution and access problems and work with relevant parties such as COVAX.  
To address these challenges, Switzerland advocates a holistic approach. Indeed, disciplining trade 
restrictions, facilitating trade, increasing transparency,  as well as setting up a health market 
information system can make a real difference in ensuring the affordability and availability of 
essential medical goods.  
4.141.   Switzerland remains committed to continuing discussions on the proposals made in 
connection with  the work of the Intellectual Property Council, including those of the European Union 
concerning compulsory licences, in the hope of reaching a mutually acceptable outcome. The aim is, 
on the one hand, to develop solutions that preserve the incentives for innovation and increased WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 31 - 
 
  production through industrial partnerships and, on the other hand, to ensure equitable access that 
is as comprehensive as possible.  
4.142.   The representative of Plurinational State of Bolivia  delivered the following statement:  
4.143.   We would like to express our deepest concerns with regards to the lack of progress in 
negotiations and we would like to reiterate our position with regards to the importance of achieving 
a concrete, serious, solution for this topic. We have seen how unfortuna tely negotiations have been 
diverted and we have no substantive results to confront the pandemic , which has taken to date too 
many lives. These have remained as simple discussions. Our delegation shares experiences with 
regards to flexibilities of the TRIPS Agreement  with regards to compulsory licensing . From our 
experience , we have seen that the flexibilities are not an effective response, there are cases that do 
not lead to good results. We think that any efforts to improve flexibilities would be well rec eived , 
but without commitments for these countries to do, it will not work no matter how far we proceed.  
4.144.   We regret the lack of commitment by many Members who are achieving effective results 
given this unprecedented health emergency. A clear demonstration o f this commitment was the 
inclusion of this proposal amongst the considerations of the WTO's response to the pandemic. We 
also thank countries who have shown their solidarity through the COVAX mechanism and also 
bilaterally, but the figures do not lie and inequalities persist. There is also no strange situation in 
technology transfer, production and other underlying topics, so we reiterate our appeal to commit 
in good faith and to take these exceptional actions which should lead to a solution and which shou ld 
enjoy wide support from Members for a fair and balanced response.  
4.145.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement : 
4.146.   We support the TRIPS Council Chair report. Allow me to make three points. First, Singapore 
supports the continuous disc ussion of all proposals that are on the table as laid out in the Chair's 
oral report. We are now seeing a resurgence of infections in many parts of the world and we must 
continue our efforts to consider all proposals given that ramping up of vaccine produc tion is a 
complex endeavour and there is no silver bullet solution. Second, we are encouraged to see some 
Members on both sides of the aisle trying to engage constructively to find convergence between the 
proposals. For example, during the small group cons ultations by Ambassador Sørli , Members have 
attempted to find areas of convergence by identifying gaps in Articles 31 and 31bis of the TRIPS 
Agreement and how a waiver could address these gaps. This is a step in the right direction , and if 
Members continue  to engage bilaterally or in small groups with the aim of finding a mutually 
agreeable outcome, there is still hope. Third, as DG Ngozi has emphasized at last week's TNC 
meeting, with an analogy of bargaining at the market, compromise is the key to a win -win solution. 
The time for rhetoric and polemic has passed and Members must come to the negotiating table with 
a give and take mindset, rather than pursuing an "I must win at all costs" approach. More 
importantly, Members should not just criticize either pr oposal, rather we should bring concrete 
suggestions on how the proposals can be improved and exercise flexibility in adjusting the proposals. 
I end by reiterating Singapore's commitment to continue engaging constructively and working with 
Members to find a  way forward on this issue at the TRIPS Council.  
4.147.   The representative of the Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
4.148.   The Philippines remains supportive of all international efforts that effectively support 
affordable and equitable access and distribution of diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines to contain 
the COVID -19 pandemic.  The Philippines has adopted a constructive position in all relevant regional 
and multilateral fora, including in ASEAN, APEC, UN, and the WTO.  Our trade policy to cons istently 
refrain from imposing export restrictions has allowed for the unhampered flow and rapid customs 
clearance of vaccines and COVID -related products through the Mabuhay Green Express Lane and 
the Bayanihan One Stop Shop for critical COVID -19 commoditi es.  
4.149.   We note that India and South Africa' s proposal to temporarily waive certain provisions of the 
Agreement on Trade -Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) to address 
the COVID -19 pandemic has garnered significant public support  and attention.  Driven by the 
objective to ensure supply and access to affordable, safe, effective, and quality vaccines and 
medicines, the Philippines has voiced support for text -based discussions on this proposal to help 
clarify and define the initiative 's scope, duration and implementation elements.  The Philippines is WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 32 - 
 
  likewise examining the EU proposal on enhanced compulsory licensing with a view to evaluate how 
it could potentially allow us and other countries to more easily operationalize flexibilities  contained 
in the TRIPS Agreement and the Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health. The Philippines also thanks 
the United States for its recent submission contained in JOB/GC/270 , submitted on 
21 September  2021. As the Philippines continues to engage in the se evolving discussions, it is 
equally important to ascertain which undertaking will yield maximum benefits to countries in terms 
of ensuring manufacturing and supply of vaccines and medicines, and securing wider access to these 
vaccines and medicines. We are committed to work towards delivering a concrete outcome to 
address this public health concern by the 12th WTO Ministerial Conference.   
4.150.   Intellectual property concerns are one element within a comprehensive strategy to support 
COVID -19 response and recov ery. The Philippines continues to push for ambitious cooperation on 
trade policy measures, including trade facilitation measures to allow for prompt border clearances 
for COVID -19 medical products, the elimination or reduction of export restrictions, the t emporary 
and voluntary reduction or suspension of tariffs on essential medical goods, technology transfer, and 
pandemic preparedness in dealing with future crises.   
4.151.   The Philippines will continue to explore opportunities to develop local vaccine manufacturi ng 
capabilities and support efforts that will improve global trade and production of vaccines. We have 
proactively pursued an investment strategy that promotes stability and predictability in an open and 
free market particularly in the pharmaceutical secto r. The government has established a green lane 
for securing permits, licenses and authorizations for the establishment and operation of a form, fill 
and finish facility for COVID -19 vaccines.  The government has also facilitated linkages between 
foreign pha rmaceutical companies and local counterparts with the view to forge collaboration from 
research and development to manufacturing.  The Government will continue to provide investment 
incentives, and pursue all avenues that will ultimately promote and safegua rd the health of our 
citizens.  
4.152.   As regards to the WTO 's and MC12 response to the pandemic, The TRIPS Council's text -
based process on the waiver proposals and Ambassador Walker 's role as facilitator are deeply 
appreciated. We encourage all delegations to coo perate with them and let them take leadership and 
guide us to deliver by MC12.  
4.153.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
4.154.   To support the efforts undertaken by the COVAX Facility and achieve equitable access to 
vaccines, Japan has pledge d USD 1 billion in total, including at the COVAX Advance Market 
Commitment Summit that Japan co -hosted in June. In addition, Japan has provided approximately 
25 million doses of COVID vaccine to various countries and regions across the world, which is the 
third largest provision of vaccine in the world so far. Furthermore, at the Seventy -Sixth Session of 
the United Nations General Assembly (and the Global C OVID -19 Summit), Japan announces that, 
with additional contributions, it will provide up to approximat ely 60 million doses of vaccine in total.  
We believe such a framework for multilateral cooperation and efforts by each country are the most 
effective way to achieve timely, fair and equitable access to medical products.  
4.155.   Japan will continue to engage in the discussion at the TRIPS Council, carefully listening to 
the views of the Members on how the intellectual property including the existing TRIPS flexibility can 
contribute to achieving our common goal of providing timely, fair and equitable access to hig h-
quality, safe, efficacious and affordable vaccines and medicines for all.  
4.156.   The representative of Peru delivered the following statement:  
4.157.   We would like to thank India, South Africa and all of those who have co -sponsored the 
proposal for the efforts they ha ve undertaken to try to achieve an agreement. We also recognize the 
other Members for their constructive participation in the various meetings which have taken place 
to date. Peru believes it is urgent to adopt joint actions to combat the COVID -19 pandemic , which 
has turned back by perhaps decades some of the achievements made under the SDGs, especially 
for developing countries. Peru recognizes vaccines against COVID -19 as a global public good and we 
think it is urgent to ensure its equitable and timely acc ess as well as access to medication and 
medical supplies in order to confront this pandemic, of which the extent and impact remains to be 
fully seen. In this connection, Peru thinks that we should not delay achieving an agreement to ensure WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 33 - 
 
  that we can allo w vaccines to be produced in other countries , and this way we can guarantee the 
inclusive, equitable and non -discriminatory access, in line with what was announced in the message 
from the President of Peru at the General Assembly of the United Nations on t he 21 September. Peru 
is one of the countries in Latin America which has been most significantly affected by the pandemic . 
We are facing a critical moment and all states here represented need to be guided by the principles 
of solidarity, efficacy, efficien cy, to try to save lives, recalling the fact that we are all subject to the 
commitment to leave nobody behind.  
4.158.   The representative of El Salvador  delivered the following statement:  
4.159.   We wish to thank Ambassador S ørli for his leadership and the presentation of  his report. We 
agree with the Members that achieving universal and equitable access to vaccines is the fundamental 
goal. We deem it necessary to accelerate the progress of this Organization in finding balanced 
solutions that take into account, on the one hand, the specific challenges faced by the Members to 
effectively cope with the pandemic, and on the other hand, the value of the current intellectual 
property system, with its flexibilities and advantages.  
4.160.   As we have previously stated, in the face of this  unprecedented, universal health crisis, 
responses that are tangible and comprehensive must be provided. As Members of the WTO, we have 
a tremendous responsibility to contribute to the solution. To this end and also in connection with the 
preparation of th e Twelfth Ministerial Conference, I reiterate the willingness of the delegation of 
El Salvador to continue working quickly and constructively on the subject of trade and health to help 
improve the production and distribution chain for vaccines.  
4.161.   The representative of Kingdom of Saudi Arabia  delivered the following statement:  
4.162.   We express our condolences to all families who have lost their loved ones all over the world. 
We would like to thank Ambassador Sørli for his tireless efforts and for his report . This item is on 
the agenda since a long time and we have not seen a big movement that gives us ambitions bearing 
in mind the short time before MC12. That is why we recall our previous statement and emphasize 
that the situation is extremely serious and ther e is no more time to lose. What we are facing now is 
an urgent need to take an action, we urge all Members to cooperate and show the necessary 
flexibility to ensure that the vaccines are affordable for all. Before I conclude, I would like to refer 
to the p roposal "COVID -19 and Beyond" in document WT/GC/W/823 and that I am pleased to 
announce the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia as a co -sponsor to the proposal which we think is the 
minimum response in this regard and should not undermine the ongoing proposals, discus sions, 
including the IP waivers to ensure the predictability and the equal distribution of vaccine across the 
world. No one is safe until everyone is.  
5  PREPARATIONS FOR THE TWELFTH SESSION OF THE MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE  
5.1  MC12 OUTCOME DOCUMENT – REPORT BY THE  CHAIR8 
5.1.  The Chair recalled  that work on a possible MC12 outcome document had resumed immediately 
after the summer break. Th at work had taken  account of, and had built on, all the Chair's 
consultations since April , and referred to  earlier reports contained in JOB/GC/259, JOB/GC/262 and 
JOB/GC/268. This report should be read in conjunction with th ose earlier reports.  
5.2.  Since the resumption after the summer break, consultations had continued in a range of 
configurations and formats. They included consultations with individual delegations and group 
coordinators from 6 to 8 September and then again on 29 September; meetings in a smaller group 
format on 14, 21 and 23 September and 5 October; and, to ensure transparency and inclusiveness, 
he had also convened two Informal Meetings of the General Council on 16 September and 
23 September.  
5.3.  Based on the views and suggestions expressed by Members during his consultations in early 
September, the Chair had reported during an Informal General Counc il meeting that work could 
begin on a possible, concise outcome document divided in two parts: Part I comprising (i) the context 
in which MC12 takes place; (ii) some broad political messages; and (iii) guidance from Ministers on 
 
8 The Chair's statement was circula ted in document JOB/GC/27 4. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 34 - 
 
  additional elements Members  may agree on; and Part II, which would make reference to or list 
separate individual decisions, work programmes, declarations or reports that were the subject of 
ongoing work in various processes – under the TNC and its subsidiary negotiating bodies, or t he GC 
and subsidiary bodies.  
5.4.  The focus in this process, in his capacity as Chair of the General Council, was to assist Members 
with Part I.   
5.5.  Guided by that, and in line with what he had heard from Members during my consultations, 
work had taken place in a small group format to ensure efficiency and avoid diverting attention from 
other ongoing work. As the Chair had  reported to the Informal General Council meetings, that small 
group was broadly representative – comprising all group coordinators and several o ther delegations. 
Transparency was being ensured through group coordinators who kep t their constituencies abreast 
of the ongoing discussions and fed the views and suggestions back into the process, as well as 
through his regular reports at Informal General  Council meetings.   
5.6.  To start work, the Chair had presented, under his own responsibility, a basic, draft skeleton of 
a structure for a possible outcome document, and he also raised some questions on the sub headers 
of the draft skeleton. He had also  provid ed a detailed report at the Informal General Council meetings 
mentioned earlier.  
5.7.  Based on what he had  heard in the preliminary exchanges in the small group, 'context' in Part  I 
should take into account both the external and internal environments in which t he Twelfth Ministerial 
Conference was taking place, namely, the pandemic, the changed trading landscape and the 
systemic/internal challenges that the WTO was facing. He also took note of Members' views that the 
broad 'political messages' should mention the need for greater solidarity and colla boration; the role 
of international trade and the WTO in global economic recovery; a reaffirmation of the principles 
enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement; the needs and interests of developing country Members, in 
particular the least developed amongst them .  
5.8.  As a next step and taking account of the constructive exchanges, the GC Chair  tried his hand 
at fleshing out the parts on 'context' and 'political messages'. In drafting possible language, he 
followed Members' guidance to focus on the broader messages, where possible convergence could 
be detected, and to stay clear of any redlines or language and concepts that might be contentious – 
mindful that any draft language was without prejudice to differences that might exist among 
delegations. He reassure d Membe rs that in his capacity as Chair of the General Council, he had made 
every effort to follow that guidance in th e process. He trusted that  Members could , and would 
continue to, engage in th e exercise in good faith and with due respect for each other's posit ions. 
5.9.  Another important point he made was that  work towards a possible MC12 outcome document 
was a Member -led process. Members were not negotiating with the Chair of the General Council. As 
always, it was the Members that would decide what would go into an y agreed outcome document. 
But work had to start somewhere, and the Chair's consultations since April had been a direct 
response to calls addressed to him as Chair of the General Council, to help Members start thinking 
about, and working towards, a possibl e outcome document – whichever form it might take.  
5.10.   The small group had had a useful and constructive first exchange on the draft language earlier 
that week and work would continue in the coming days and weeks.  An initial exchange of views had 
also taken place on what could form part of "Guidance on additional elements that Members can 
agree on" under Part I. Based on the discussion and initial reactions, he would try his hand at fleshing 
out some preliminary, draft language under that third sub -heading. As with 'context' and broad 
'political messages', that draft language, under his own responsibility, was meant to serve as a 
starting point, not an endpoint.  
5.11.   To ensure transparency and inclusiveness, he would continue to convene regular Informal 
General Council meetings to provide updates to the broader Membership.  
5.12.   In terms of timelines, the Chair encourage d delegations to continue to work towards a draft 
outcome document by the end of October. At that point, the Director -General and the Chair 
conside red that it might be useful and necessary to take stock of progress in all areas.   WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 35 - 
 
  5.13.   The Chair thank ed all group coordinators and delegations, in particular those who had 
provided useful guidance and suggestions. He would continue to count on their construct ive and 
active participation.  
5.2  WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE – REPORT BY THE CHAIR9 
5.14.   The Chair  recalled  that he had indicated in his July report  that he would start consultations 
on the E -commerce Work Programme and Moratorium following the summer break. He had 
subsequently invited all delegations to consultations in September. In addition to the delegations 
that had accepted his invitation to consult specifically on e -commerce, others had shared their views 
during his consultations on the MC12 outcome document.  
5.15.   In his introductory remarks to each delegation, the Chair had recalled the need to intensify 
work towards a possible draft decision for the consideration of Ministers at MC12 and re newed his 
call to delegations to come forward with proposals on draft decisions that would serve as a basis for 
further consultations. Furthermore, he had noted that, despite the well -known differences in 
Members' positions, many had continue d to attach im portance to e -commerce, particularly in light 
of the current pandemic. The Chair acknowledged that the pandemic had highlighted e -commerce 
opportunities as well as its challenges – both of which should continue to be discussed within the 
WTO.  
5.16.   To better foc us the work in preparation for MC12, the Chair had asked delegations the 
following questions:  
5.17.   First, what were the elements delegations wished to see in a Ministerial Decision on the Work 
Programme on E -commerce?  
5.18.   Second, in the absence of any specific pr oposal on a draft Ministerial Decision from Members, 
were delegations comfortable with using previous decisions as the basis for a possible draft MC12 
decision?  
5.19.   The Chair recalled that, in past decisions, Ministers had generally: taken note of the work 
done; agreed to continue and reinvigorate the Work Programme; and instructed the General Council 
to hold periodic reviews and to report to the Ministerial Conference. Ministers had also agreed to 
maintain the practice of not imposing customs duties on electro nic transmissions thereby renewing 
the moratorium until the next Ministerial Session.  
5.20.   On his first question, delegations had generally reiterated their views with respect to the 
moratorium and the Work Programme. Proponents for the moratorium had considere d its extension 
a priority for MC12. They had reiterated its role in providing a stable and predictable trading 
environment. One delegation had noted that, in a time of unprecedented acceleration of the digital 
economy, the moratorium was the only contribu tion the WTO made to digital trade.  
5.21.   On the other hand, some delegations had said that it would be difficult for them to agree to 
an extension of the moratorium without clarity on its scope and implications. In that respect, some 
delegations had indicated the need for further discussions and one delegation had asked that 
proponents of the moratorium submit proposals highlighting its benefits. One delegation had 
reiterated its view that the moratorium did not apply to the content transmitted electronically.   
5.22.   One delegation had noted that there were a number of ongoing studies on the effects of the 
moratorium on individual countries. It had therefore suggested that Members could consider 
extending the moratorium pending conclusion of those studies and with ass urances that those issues 
would be looked at, including through a possible stocktake exercise in 2022.  
5.23.   Another delegation had agreed that Members should continue discussing the scope, definition 
and impact of the moratorium. However, such discussion shoul d not be a condition for Ministers' 
decision on extending the moratorium.  
 
9 The Chair's statement was circulated in document JOB/GC/27 5. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 36 - 
 
  5.24.   Overall, no delegation had opposed the continuation of the Work Programme – though some 
delegations  had indicated that they could not accept a decision to continue work under the Wo rk 
Programme without at least an extension of the moratorium.  
5.25.   A few delegations had called for Members to engage in the Work Programme in letter and 
spirit and to have specific objectives and timelines going forward. While some delegations had 
provided el ements to be discussed including the development aspects and bridging the digital divide, 
others had noted that the Work Programme was already broad enough to cover many issues. One 
delegation had stressed the need to avoid entering into discussions on spe cific elements of the Work 
Programme or on definitions, noting the limited time before MC12.  
5.26.   With respect to his second question, the majority of Members were ready to work on the basis 
of previous decisions , notably MC11. Some had preferred a slimmer decision without too many 
details or specific dates. Several delegations had noted that previous decisions did not clarify the 
scope of electronic transmissions and it would thus be difficult to agree to another extension of the 
morator ium on that basis. Other delegations had said that, although previous decisions did not 
include a permanent moratorium, they were open to consider another extension as a compromise.  
5.27.   Some delegations had mentioned the link to the TRIPS moratorium on non -violation and 
situation complaints and how they expected that link to play a role in the final decision. Others were 
less certain about whether the trade -off was still relevant.  
5.28.   In conclusion, with respect to priorities and the work going forward, Members' v iews continue d 
to diverge. Nonetheless, the Chair appreciated the flexibility and solution -finding approaches that 
had been taken by many delegations. He hoped that that spirit could guide the discussions going 
forward.  
5.29.   As he had mentioned in July, the Ch air emphasise d that, given the Member -driven nature of 
their work, any decision on the way forward with respect to both the moratorium and the Work 
Programme was in Members' hands. In his consultations, he emphasised the need to have something 
to submit to  Ministers for their consideration and decision at MC12.  
5.30.   In that respect, he was  encouraged that some delegations had indicated their readiness to 
submit draft texts, possibly before the November Council. As Chair, he remain ed ready to facilitate 
further consultations. The Chair called on Members to be pragmatic, constructive and to listen to 
each other so as to find middle ground. He remind ed Members  that time was not on their side – they 
must do their best to progress on that matter.  
5.3  WTO RESPONSE TO THE  PANDEMIC – REPORT BY THE FACILITATOR10 
5.31.   Ambassador David Walker ( New Zealand), Facilitator for the WTO response to the pandemic , 
provided the following report:  
5.32.   Since my first report to the General Council on 27 July (JOB/GC/269), I have undertaken 
consultations and meetings with the aim of ensuring an informal, active and frank exchange among 
delegations.  
5.33.   As I had announced in July, I convened a series of thematic sessions in September. Five 
sessions have taken place, on 1, 8, 13, 15 and 21 September  respectively . These sessions have 
focused on six themes, namely: (1) export restrictions; (2) trade facilitation, regulatory coherence 
and cooperation, and tariffs; (3) the role of services trade; (4) transparency and monitoring; 
(5) collabora tion with other organizations and engagement with key stakeholders; and (6) a 
framework for future pandemics and crises. In addition to these thematic sessions, I also held 
consultations and meetings with delegations in different configurations.  
5.34.   The purpos e of my report today, which I make on my own responsibility, is to provide you 
with an update on discussions, without prejudice to the views of any particular Member.  
 
10 The Facilitator's report was circulated in document JOB/GC/27 3. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 37 - 
 
  5.35.   Overall, discussions suggested support for a holistic approach in formulating the WTO's 
multilateral response to COVID -19. The exceptional character of the current crisis – in terms of 
human losses and economic and social challenges – was stressed, as was the importance of a 
meaningful and credible outcome at MC12. At the same time, the need to be pragmatic and to focus, 
on a priority basis, on those issues on which consensus can be found in time for MC12 was 
highlighted.  
5.36.   For each topic, delegations were asked to consider priorities and identify elements that could 
be the basis for an outcome in the various proposals made by Members. I also asked delegations to 
consider their priorities in relation to the elements compiled by Ambassador Spencer and 
Ambassador Tan in RD/GC/14 after the consultations they undertook before the summer.  
5.37.   For many of the topics discussed, delegations found that the elements in RD/GC/14 provided 
a useful basis for further consideration. It was also  recognized that Members comprising over 80% 
of world GDP have collectively pledged to ensure that any emergency trade measures designed to 
tackle COVID -19, if deemed necessary, are targeted, proportionate, transparent, temporary, do not 
create unnecessary  barriers to trade or disruption to supply chains, take into account the interests 
of the most vulnerable countries and are consistent with WTO rules.  
5.38.   Discussions highlighted that the type of outcome on this issue would be a political declaration, 
and not a new legal instrument seeking to alter existing rights and obligations under the WTO 
Agreements.  
5.39.   In moving forward, delegations have generally emphasized the need for better coordination 
and coherence, transparency, and up -to-date information. Applying, as relevant, across all thematic 
areas, the valuable role of the Secretariat, with its neutrality and accountability preserved, as well 
as the importance of the Member -driven nature of the WTO, were also mentioned.  
5.40.   As I indicated in earlier occasions, the proposed TRIPS waiver is under consideration in the 
TRIPS Council and has therefore not been the subject of my consultations. That said, a number of 
delegations noted that an outcome in that area was critical for the adoption of an overall outcome 
on the W TO's response to the pandemic. Some have also suggested to consider how and when best 
to align the TRIPS Council process with the consultations I have been facilitating.  
5.41.   I will now take up each theme, in the order they were taken up, and give you an overvi ew of 
discussions.  
Export Restrictions and Prohibitions  
 
5.42.   A large number of delegations attached high priority to a meaningful outcome at MC12 on the 
use of export restrictions and prohibitions in the context of the pandemic.  
5.43.   It was noted that export restri ctions have a severe impact on the availability of essential 
products needed to combat the COVID -19 pandemic. Restrictions on essential inputs also disrupt 
global supply chains and, as a result, hamper our collective ability to increase global production o f 
essential products, such as vaccines.  
5.44.   In that context, discussions underscored the importance of clearly affirming our political 
resolve to keeping markets open and commit to using export restrictions only as a last resort option. 
This could be compleme nted with a commitment to avoid new restrictions and regularly review 
whether existing restrictions are still needed or whether they can be rolled back. In case new 
restrictions were being considered, a set of general guiding principles could be followed.  
5.45.   In addition, enhanced transparency and monitoring tools may be needed to keep track of 
real-world developments in this area and the observance of these commitments. Given the 
unprecedented nature of the pandemic as a truly global crisis, it was considered that it would be 
useful to discuss additional parameters and transparency and monitoring provisions for the use of 
export restrictions and bans during such crises. It was suggested to tackle this as part of a work 
programme to be initiated after MC12.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 38 - 
 
  5.46.   Finally, it was also noted that restrictions and bans had been introduced because of shortages 
in the supply of essential products such as masks and vaccines. This highlighted the need for further 
work to promote more resilient supply chains, including by incr easing global production for such 
products and diversifying their production in different regions.  
Trade Facilitation, Regulatory Coherence and Cooperation, and Tariffs  
 
5.47.   There was broad convergence on experience sharing. Delegations supported deepening the ir 
understanding and learning from each other's policy responses to the challenges created by the 
pandemic. In that context, dedicated events, compilations or studies can help identify best practices 
and prepare recommendations or guidelines in the areas o f trade facilitation and regulatory 
cooperation. This work could be continued in regular bodies such as the Trade Facilitation 
Committee, the Technical Barriers to Trade Committee, and the Market Access Committee.  
5.48.   Another area of interest concerns the acce leration of implementation of trade facilitation 
reforms. It was recognized that this would need to be done on a voluntary basis, depending on the 
capacity of each Member. Going forward, Members could also explore additional measures to 
streamline import a nd export procedures, such as the digitalization of trade procedures and the 
streamlining of conformity assessment procedures.  
5.49.   Many delegations called for further work in the WTO to address regulatory bottlenecks 
affecting production and supply of essenti al medical goods. Simplifying regulatory procedures and 
promoting the sharing of regulatory dossiers and data was mentioned. Participants also exchanged 
different views regarding the recognition of vaccine approvals.  
5.50.   On tariffs, Members acknowledged that t ariff reduction or elimination can help facilitate access 
to essential health products during a pandemic. Individual Members or groups of interested Members 
may therefore wish to pursue temporary or permanent tariff reductions on a voluntary basis. In so 
doing, the indicative list of critical COVID -19 vaccine inputs prepared by the Secretariat was 
mentioned as a possible useful reference tool.  
The Role of Services Trade  
 
5.51.   Discussions underscored the importance of the role of trade in services in the context  of the 
WTO's trade response to COVID -19.  
5.52.   The importance of facilitating the international operations of services suppliers involved in the 
production and distribution of vaccines and other medical products in sectors such as logistics, 
transport and dist ribution was stressed. Broad support was expressed for the sharing of experiences 
to establish best practices regarding such facilitating measures. The suggestion to share experiences 
on the facilitation of health services was also discussed.  
5.53.   The impact o f the pandemic and of measures to protect public health on services sectors was 
underscored, including the trade impact on developing countries. The broader relevance of services 
trade for the recovery was also stressed.  
5.54.   The value of a political message u rging to avoid the introduction of new barriers to trade in 
services was pointed out. The importance of removing COVID -19-related public health measures 
that inhibit services trade once conditions permit was also underscored.  
5.55.   Participants also exchanged d ifferent views regarding the facilitation of the movement of 
essential workers as well as on the recognition of vaccine certificates and their trade impact.  
Transparency and Monitoring  
 
5.56.   Enhanced transparency and monitoring of measures taken in response to the pandemic 
emerged as a clear priority for most delegations.  
5.57.   The need for full compliance with existing notification obligations was highlighted, as was the 
need for a more effective real-time monitoring of measures taken in response to the pandemic.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 39 - 
 
  5.58.   For this reason, there were also calls to reaffirm our commitment to timely and comprehensive 
notifications, explore gaps in the existing notification procedures and seek solutions to imp rove the 
scope of the information that is available with the Secretariat. It was suggested that this could be 
further tackled as part of a work programme to be initiated after MC12.  
5.59.   In addition to notifications, the importance of the trade monitoring exerc ise was recognized, 
with the idea expressed that Members affirm their commitment to fully engaging in the preparation 
and discussion of the trade monitoring reports.  
Collaboration with other International Organizations and other Stakeholders  
 
5.60.   The importanc e of close collaboration with other international organizations and stakeholders 
was widely recognized. Delegations recognized and expressed support for the WTO Director -
General's contribution to making the WTO part of an integrated global response to the pandemic 
and her promotion of collaborative efforts, including through high -level dialogues with international 
organizations, the private sector and other key stakeholders.  
5.61.   Continuing and intensifying the collaboration with other relevant international org anizations, 
including WHO and WIPO, was encouraged.  
5.62.   As part of the way forward, support was expressed for the WTO Secretariat to monitor trade 
flows, gather relevant information and analyse gaps in collaboration with other international 
organizations, as well as to collect data from the private sector to assist Members in their response 
to the pandemic.  
Better Preparedness and a Framework for Future Pandemics and Crises  
 
5.63.   Many delegations expressed the view that an outcome on trade and health should address  
both the WTO's response to the current pandemic and its ability to cope with future crises. To this 
end, a framework to guide the WTO's work post MC12 on how to make the multilateral trading 
system more resilient and better prepared to future crises was p roposed.  
5.64.   It was suggested that, based on exchange of information and sharing of lessons learned, such 
a framework could build on the lessons learned in the current pandemic and set out guidelines and 
best practices for more coordinated responses in the fu ture.  
5.65.   Delegations also identified specific elements that could be covered by the framework. These 
include issues relating to trade facilitation; export restrictions; regulatory coherence; transparency, 
and monitoring; scaling -up of production and distribu tion of essential goods; services and crisis 
preparedness and resiliency; and coordination with relevant stakeholders, including international 
organizations and the private sector. It was also observed that the framework could enable Members 
to better leve rage the knowledge generated by the networks being created by the Director -General 
to coordinate among relevant international organizations and development agencies, and to better 
harness the Secretariat's analytical work in support of the Members.  
5.66.   Several  delegations emphasized that such a framework for future preparedness should be 
developed within the existing mandate and institutional structure of the WTO, with a process for 
coordination of work undertaken. It was also stressed that the framework should  set out clear 
timeframes, with shorter timelines for reports and stock -taking for work on the immediate COVID -19 
response, which would be the initial focus.  
Concluding Remarks  
 
5.67.   I want to thank all delegations that put forward their views and ideas during these 
consultations. I think that we are united in our understanding that the WTO needs to formulate a 
credible multilateral response to the pandemic.  
5.68.   Regarding the way forward, should the Chair wish, I will be looking to take these discussions 
forward in  the coming weeks through different configurations that would allow us to undertake a 
frank and solutions -oriented text -based discussion. I would continue to report on this process WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 40 - 
 
  through open -ended informal meetings, as well as formally to the General Co uncil, at the invitation 
of its Chair.  
5.69.   H.E. Mawine G. Diggs, Minister of Commerce and Industry of Liberia  delivered the following 
statement:  
5.70.   I would like to thank you for the opportunity to intervene in this meeting today as WTO 
Members prepare for MC12. I am speaking on behalf of the g7+ WTO Accessions Group in my 
capacity as co -coordinator of the Group together with Timor -Leste.   
5.71.   Let me recall that the Group, established on the margins of MC11, represents nine fragile and 
conflict -affected LDCs associate d with WTO accessions, comprising three Article XII LDCs , 
Afghanistan, Liberia and Yemen;  and six acceding LDCs , Comoros, Sao Tome & Principé, Somalia, 
South Sudan, Sudan and Timor -Leste;  joined by the goal of using economic integration through WTO 
membership to promote peace and stability. The Group is also a sub -set of the g7+, an association 
of 20 fragile and conflict -affected states (FCS) where 1.5 billion people live today.  As you may recall, 
until the end of last year, the Group was led by Ambas sador Mohammad Haqjo, former Permanent 
Representative of Afghanistan to the WTO.  
5.72.   I am in Geneva this week to celebrate and reflect on Liberia's five -year membership in the 
WTO. As you may know, Liberia was one of the latest Members to join the Organizatio n together 
with Afghanistan in July 2016. As I said at the anniversary event attended by the Director -General 
Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala and the ITC Executive Director Pamela Coke -Hamilton on Monday, "WTO 
accession marked a turning point in Liberia's history aime d at economic transformation for inclusive 
growth", and "Joining the WTO is not an end in itself but the beginning of the road to the full 
integration into the multilateral trading system".  
5.73.   Our membership journey has not always been easy as a fragile and conflict -affected and 
capacity -constrained LDC, but we are more than convinced that this has been the right one for 
Liberia. This is especially true for the opportunity to raise the voice of the most vulnerable even 
among the LDCs, to make the case for tra de and WTO membership as a force for good and as a 
stabilizer for our societies and economies. This is the essence of the Trade for Peace Initiative, now 
a Programme, which the Group has advocated since the last Ministerial Conference.    
5.74.   Let me first thank  you for your leadership and efforts, together with Director -General Ngozi, 
in driving the preparatory process for MC12 despite the challenges posed by COVID -19 which has 
disproportionately affected our peoples.  The Group strongly believes that we need to deliver results 
at the 12th Ministerial Conference – specially to make this Organization more relevant by tacking 
the issues of vaccine equity, fisheries subsidies, agriculture, and other pressing challenges 
confronting our day -to-day lives. We sincerely t hank all Members for their efforts in closing existing 
gaps, while acknowledging that the Group has not been able to contribute to your discussions as 
much as we would have liked as many of us remain outside the system.  
5.75.   Today, the Group would like to call  upon the WTO membership to consider more actions at 
MC12 to make the multilateral trading system more inclusive and sensitive to the needs of the most 
vulnerable, fragile, and conflict -affected states (FCS). More specifically, the Group strongly believes 
that MC12 is the right platform to reconfirm the role of trade and economic integration in promoting 
sustainable peace and economic prosperity, as the GATT and the WTO did for a large number of 
economies, and to develop a Work Programme on Trade for Peace for FCS, especially those 
remaining outside of the WTO.  
5.76.   For our countries, who have suffered from decades of war, conflict and poverty, the effective 
WTO membership is a crucial factor in fostering development and prosperity. Trade is critical for our 
social and economic development, creation of jobs and livelihoods and hence building sustainable 
peace and stability. However, this can only happen when we are able to get maximum benefit from 
trade and those benefits trickle down to our citizens. Still, acce ss to free trade is often the subject 
of lengthy negotiation of rules and regulations.  
5.77.   Let me remind the esteemed audience how fragile peace can be. We have all been devastated 
by what happened in Afghanistan just less than two months ago, ironically only a few weeks after 
they celebrated the 5th anniversary of WTO membership at the end of J uly. In a joint celebration of WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 41 - 
 
  our anniversaries at a UN event, I remember the then Deputy Minister of Industry and Commerce 
of Afghanistan, Mr. Sulaiman Bin Shah, eloquently outlining his country's triple objectives of "peace -
, state - and market -building"  embedded in Afghanistan's WTO membership. I believe that Trade for 
Peace remains as relevant today for Afghanistan despite the politically different circumstances, and 
the Group calls on the international community, including this forum, not to abandon th e people of 
Afghanistan who have placed their faith in the values of the multilateral trading system.   
5.78.   The Group is grateful to Director -General Ngozi, Deputy Director -General Zhang and the 
Secretariat for their support to translate the Group's vision on T rade for Peace into activities since 
MC11.  The support for the Trade for Peace agenda has been overwhelming, not only from the trade 
community, but also from the peace and humanitarian communities.  Many bureaucratic and 
institutional siloes have been torn down and a new space for multilateral cooperation has emerged 
in solidarity with the most vulnerable group of countries.  
5.79.   Now, the Group requests the entire Membership to support and be part of this noble cause.  
In the coming weeks, the Group intends to de velop and submit a WTO Work Programme on Trade 
for Peace dedicated to fragile and conflict -affected states for consideration by the WTO membership. 
This Programme shall be action -oriented, building on various activities which have been 
implemented by the W TO and its partners in the Trade for Peace Network.   
5.80.   It is also our request that if there is a Ministerial outcome document, which the Group believes 
is extremely important for the future work of the Organization, the interests of fragile and conflict -
affected states be duly reflected in this document. We intend to submit a draft text for your 
consideration shortly after this General Council meeting and I hope that the Chair would take this 
into account in his next round of consultations.   
5.81.   Finally, I would like to inform that the Group plans to hold its second Ministerial meeting on 
the margins of MC12 to issue another Declaration outlining our vision on Trade for Peace, further to 
the first Declaration issued at MC11 which can be found in document WT/MIN(17 )/51. 
5.82.   The representative of the Philippines  provided the following statement:  
5.83.   Regarding  the first sub item, t he Philippines thanks the Chair for his briefings on preparations 
for MC12 and supports your approach to have a more compact and political text.  This would provide 
us with both the strategic direction and policy space to elaborate work agendas for a more ambitious 
MC13.  The Philippines supports the inclusion of elements related to WTO reform that includes the 
issue of improved transparency and the nee d for Ministers to signal their collective resolve to restore 
the two -tier dispute settlement system no later than MC13.  The Philippines would also like to see 
Ministers providing both principled as well as concrete guidance that would help frame our futur e 
work programs in areas such as agriculture, sustainability and protection of the environment, the 
digital economy and in highlighting the positive role and contribution of the WTO to attaining our 
leaders mandated SDG 's that ideally includes delivering o n SGD 14.6.  
5.84.   Regarding the second subitem , we believe it is important to deliver a decision on Ecommerce 
given its importance in the global post -pandemic economic recovery. Thus, we reiterate our support 
in advancing the Work Program on E -Commerce and the e xtension of the moratorium until the next 
Ministerial Conference.    
5.85.   Regarding the third sub item, g iven the immense challenges and hardships that the C OVID  
pandemic has wrought, the Philippines is in favour  of a Ministers delivering a strong message on the 
WTO's response to the pandemic.  We appreciate Ambassador Walker 's efforts in integrating the 
numerous proposals and initiatives that are currently on the table and we look towards the inclusion 
of pragmati c trade policy measures, such as those contained in the Trade and Health Initiative, that 
would provide us with the tools to help enhance resilience and stabilize global supply chains.  We 
also concur with those colleagues who have cited the need for a work  program to monitor progress 
on these actions.  
5.86.   The representative of Nepal  provided the following statement:  
5.87.   My delegation appreciates you, Chair, for your contribution to engaging all Members in 
developing the outcome document collectively. The LDC Group has already submitted its perspective WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 42 - 
 
  and we expect that our submission will be taken into account while finalizing it. Additionally, the 
outcome document should also take into account the LDC ministerial declaration for the MC12. 
Regarding the priorit ies, my delegation would like to recall the views expressed in various meetings 
and consultations held earlier and would like to reiterate for considering those positively.   
5.88.   While turning to the work programme on electronic commerce, I would like to recall the  views 
expressed during the consultation with you, Chair, on 13 April and reiterate that both addressing 
the existing digital divide between and within the countries, and just share of benefit of e -commerce 
should be ensured through the work programme on e -commerce.   
5.89.   Similarly, my delegation is of the view that we must be able to come up with a concrete 
package on WTO 's response to the COVID -19 pandemic with special priority to LDCs and LLDCs. 
Ensuring people at large that the world has access to vaccine an d therapeutics would be an important 
deliberation of the MC12 to rebuild trust in the WTO.  
5.90.   The representative of Brunei Darussalam  provided the following statement:  
5.91.   Thank you also to Ambassador David Walker on his efforts these past few months as 
Facilita tor-led Multilateral Process on the WTO Response to the Pandemic. As this is the first time I 
am taking the floor on this matter at the GC, I would also like to recognize and appreciate the efforts 
of Ambassadors Tan Hun Seng and Cheryl Spencer in their wo rk under the "Informal Sub -Group on 
the WTO 's COVID -19 Response " process which , as Ambassador Walker has mentioned , has also fed 
into this multilateral process we are discussing today.  
5.92.   I would like to speak on both the subitems on MC12 Outcome Document and WTO Response 
to the Pandemic under this Agenda item 5  on Preparations for MC12 , together.  
5.93.   Specifically with regard to the report by Ambassador Walker, we would like to make three 
points.  
5.94.   Firstly, on Theme 1 on export restrictions. Brunei was one of those countries that were 
affected at the start of the pandemic by export restrictions and disru pted supply chains of essential 
medical equipment and food products, so we strongly see the merit of including this in a Ministerial 
Document or Outcome.  
5.95.   Secondly, on Theme 5: Collaboration and cooperation with other international organisations 
and key st akeholders. The pandemic has shown the importance of working together, not just 
between countries, but with organisations and the private sector as well. We see this element has 
been addressed well in the Trade and Health Initiative and encourage others to  look into it as well.  
5.96.   This brings me to my third point on Theme 6 of Ambassador Walker 's report, as closer 
cooperation and collaboration also help enhance resiliency and improve preparedness. We agree and 
support an outcome on trade and health that estab lishes a framework or work programme that 
addresses not just the current pandemic but also that considers what work needs to be done to 
prepare for such a situation in future.  
5.97.   We also note that many of the elements we are discussing today have also been co vered in 
the Trade and Health Initiative, so we encourage the identification of common elements under this 
Initiative as to facilitate a multilateral outcome on this topic for MC12.  
5.98.   Brunei Darussalam remains committed to continue supporting this process fo r a strong 
outcome at MC12 on this matter, and in this regard we look forward to the initiation of text -based 
discussions to expedite this process.  
5.99.   In this regard, we would like to thank you Chair for circulating a suggested language for 
inclusion in an MC 12 Outcome Document and for the 3 possible questions you posed for guidance 
on additional elements, and are things which we can and certainly will consider. Having said that, 
as they say , the devil is in the details , and so we welcome having extensive disc ussions on this.   
5.100.   Brunei Darussalam believes that it is important to have a strong response from the WTO on 
the COVID -19 pandemic, particularly for MC12, and to demonstrate that the WTO still remains WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 43 - 
 
  relevant and credible today, and that it has a real and central role to play in the global economic 
recovery. This is, in our view, the only way an outcome on MC12 can be meaningful, and we are of 
the view that the earlier we put pen to paper on this the better.  
5.101.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the follo wing statement:  
5.102.   On the outcome document, we wish to commend you for your tireless efforts in developing 
the outcome document, which you have done through consultations. We must attest to the fact that 
the process you conducted was transparent and inclusive. The proposed d raft element which you 
presented for consultation to us was very concise and indeed within the context of our expectations 
based on experience and the current situation. We appreciate the update and we are willing and 
available to remain engaged in this pr ocess until the desired goal of achieving a successful MC12 
result. We still need to maintain our position that for MC12 to be successful, Members must remain 
engaged and they must be willing to be very flexible as well as to narrow the number of the 
negot iating issues that are expecting outcomes in MC12. The MC12 is very close, the issues are 
many and still divergencies are also much, therefore we have to narrow our expectations to ensure 
that we look at the issues that have more convergence so that we can  have a fruitful outcome in 
MC12 and a very successful one.  
5.103.   On e -commerce, we wish to reaffirm our support for more structured and targeted 
discussions on horizontal and vertical issues regarding the trade -related aspect of e -commerce  on 
the Work Programm e, with the view to setting an inclusive and development -oriented agenda for 
consideration by Ministers at MC12. Discussions should, among others, clarify the scope as well as 
address classification issues. The post MC12 agenda should include effective way s of addressing the 
north -south digital divide and digital inclusion existing within developing countries.  
5.104.   Finally, on the WTO's response to the pandemic, we thank Ambassador Walker for his report, 
and we commend the initiative by the WTO for searching ve ry clear measures that the WTO can use 
to respond to the pandemic. Our delegation appreciates the ongoing process of consultation by 
Ambassador Walker, we are confident that the outcome of this work may help in finding measures 
that the WTO could respond n ot only to COVID -19, rather the future pandemics, especially the six 
areas highlighted in his report. In this regard, the outcome is expected to also include the TRIPS 
Waiver as I ntellectual Property  is key in any solution to respond to the pandemic.  
5.105.   The representative of Mexico  delivered the following statement:  
5.106.   Welcome to new colleagues joining the organization. I thank you and Ambassador Walker 
for the reports and tireless efforts. In terms of the outcome document, I would like to state that for 
our del egation it is very important that we have a Ministerial document that recognizes the current 
context in the health crisis and the role that our organization can play in the global recovery as well 
as indications of future work. But given the short time rem aining to us we think that we need to 
avoid what has now been called the X approach and concentrate on topics that enjoy consensus and 
not waste efforts on divergences that we know will never be resolved. The Ministerial Conference 
that is agreed upon by a ll of us will be the best sign that we share an objective and a vision in terms 
of what our organization should be. We should not have any other Ministerial Conference if it does 
not contain a deliverable. I would like to refer to previous interventions on  the importance of the 
moratorium on e -commerce, and how important role it plays in critical moments such as the 
pandemic as well as the need to strengthen the e -commerce Work Programme. Finally, on the WTO 
response to the pandemic, we think that any outco me should look at the existing architecture of the 
organization and efforts should focus on those topics which enjoy greatest convergence of positions. 
It would be a shame that because of our differences we are not able to provide the WTO with an 
opportuni ty to contribute to global solutions. To conclude, our limiting factor here is time, but our 
capacity for understanding and consensus should prevail over our differences so you can count on 
the agreement of our delegation to arrive at MC12 with these topic s resolved.  
5.107.   The representative of Mauritius, on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
5.108.   On your report on the outcome for MC12, we are thankful for all the work that has gone into 
this and the African Group will be coming back with proposals on this with the purpose of making 
the text happier  and more inclusive.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 44 - 
 
  5.109.   On the second issue of electronic commerce, the report by the Chair, we welcome all the 
work that has been done on this . The position of the African Group is already ve ry well known, so I 
will not reiterate this here except to say that we do expect the Ministerial Declaration to have a 
significant outcome on this Work Programme, how it may be reinvigorated and how it can benefit 
Member states.  
5.110.   On the issue of the respon se to the pandemic, we heard Ambassador Walker's report and 
we thank him for the efforts he continues to do in this regard. Clearly there is a lot of work that has 
gone in . He made the point that the TRIPS Waiver is under consideration of the TRIPS Council  while 
he is focusing on the other part, but he also made the point that some Members consider critical 
that the TRIPS Waiver issue is also addressed. Indeed, we do see both these issues, the TRIPS 
Waiver issue and the rest of the response to the pandemic as being just one component and this is 
why we say all the time that without the Waiver we could not consider that there is an adequate 
response to the trade and health. I just wanted to share as well about the fact that the day before 
yesterday Cameroon b ecame the 15th Member to have deposited the instrument  of ratification for 
the African Medicines Agency, this has been a 12 year process and I was just thinking of ways 
whether we could find ways to support the rapid establishment of this agency as this wi ll certainly 
help to enhance the regulatory oversight and facilitate access to safe and affordable medicine.  
5.111.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
5.112.   The LDC Group supports your work  on an outcome document for MC12. We have 
communicated to you the elements which we think should appear in the document for LDCs and we 
will soon see the adoption of the Ministers' Declaration for LDCs for MC12, which will be considered 
for the outcome document.  
5.113.   On electronic co mmerce, we will not repeat previous statements on the Work Programme 
and the declaration of the LDCs in 2019. Let us not forget that digital platforms and goods and 
services and infrastructure are integral part of our commitment during the pandemic and dur ing 
lockdowns, at a time when we need to mobilize to minimize the digital divide, which has shown itself 
during this period, and that applies to today's meeting as well. The LDC Group supports Members in 
their quest for a solution to submit to Ministers fo r MC12.  
5.114.   To conclude, on the Facilitator's Report on the WTO's Response to the Pandemic, we would 
like to thank Ambassador David Walker for his report. The LDC Group would like to urgently ask 
Members to propose a collection of measures for the WTO and its response to COVID -19. The 
Director General has also shown great leadership in t his area and on behalf of the LDC Group I would 
like to welcome that. We need to submit to Ministers an important decision for MC12 in order to 
guarantee the world's access to vaccines and treatments but also to the equipment that is needed 
to save lives. We need to reject discriminatory practices and practices that are restrictive, which 
only exacerbate this problem. The COVID -19 pandemic, contrary to general impressions, is not over , 
that is why we need to focus on our response to it.  
5.115.   The representative o f Paraguay  delivered the following statement: . 
5.116.   Paraguay wishes to thank you for your reports, as well as Ambassador Walker for his work.  
I will first address item 5.A, on the Twelfth Ministerial Conference (MC12) outcome document. We 
generally support the suggestions concerning context wording, political message and guidance from 
Ministers, in particular with regard to the impact of the COVID -19 crisis and the role of the WTO in 
achieving economic recovery.  
5.117.   As for the suggested elements, my delegation would  like to request the inclusion of wording 
on the importance of outcomes in the market access pillar in agriculture, the adoption of a work 
programme that recognizes the additional challenges faced by Landlocked Developing Countries and 
therefore the necess ity of preserving special and differential treatment for this category of countries. 
On systemic issues, we support language that advocates the restoration of the Appellate Body and 
the necessity of setting up a work programme for the reform of the WTO.  Furthermore, we consider 
it important to include language that recognizes the progress made in the joint initiatives in which 
we participate, in particular the initiatives on e -commerce, micro, small and medium -sized 
enterprises (MSMEs), investment facilitat ion for development, services domestic regulation and WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 45 - 
 
  trade and gender; language which in turn encourages participants to continue working in an open, 
inclusive and transparent manner.  
5.118.   Regarding item 5.B, on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce and Mo ratorium, 
Paraguay shares the view on the need to reinvigorate the work in line with the 1998 Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce and we support the extension of the moratorium until at least 
the next Ministerial Conference. We are open to begin working on specific wording as soon as 
possible.  
5.119.   Finally, regarding item 5.C, on the WTO response to the pandemic, Paraguay wishes to 
reiterate that during the General Council in July, it circulated document WT/GC/W/826, co -sponsored 
by the delegations of Colombia , Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama and the Dominican Republic. It puts 
forward additional elements that we would like to see taken into account in the process led by 
Ambassador Walker. Paraguay encourages the Members to keep working and to consider our joint 
proposal favourably, as a contribution from the countries of the Latin American region in the 
upcoming thematic discussions.  
5.120.   The representative of Argentina  delivered the following statement:  
5.121.   We welcome your report and your work on the final document of the next Ministerial 
Conference, as well as your efforts on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce.   
5.122.   Now, I would like to specifically address the WTO's response to the pandemic.  We thank 
Ambassador Walker for his report.  All the Members agree that the WTO's response to the pandemic 
must be one of the outcomes of the Twelfth Ministerial Conference (MC12), to be achieved in a 
transparent, open and inclusive manner.  These past few months, several initiatives and individual 
proposals have been disseminated in an effort to bring forth elements of this response, and they 
must now be streamlined into a single collective process.  The Ministerial Conference is less than two 
months away, which calls for realism in our expectations of what can be achieved by Decemb er. We 
must lay the foundations for future work, beyond the Conference.  
5.123.   In Argentina's view, the proposals should be examined through the lens of imbalance in 
access to COVID vaccines, medical equipment and treatments. According to figures from the World 
Health Organization (WHO), over 50 – developing – countries missed the target fixed by WHO to 
vaccinate 10% of their population by the end of September. Some countries haven't even started. 
Meanwhile, over 60% of the developed world has been fully vaccinate d. We should therefore be able 
to reach a consensus to rectify this inequality and put an end to the pandemic.  
5.124.   With regards to Members' proposals, we wish to make a few specific preliminary comments.  
We believe that emergency situations and specific market  circumstances warrant some leeway that 
allows countries to implement the necessary measures. Lately, restrictions on exports have 
sustained the availability of a number of essential goods needed to supply the local market, with a 
view to preventing shorta ges, especially in developing countries, in the context of an unprecedented 
health emergency. These measures must be evaluated first and foremost against health access and 
national health policy priorities, and not solely from a commercial standpoint, bear ing in mind the 
differences in capacity between developing and developed countries. We must guard ourselves from 
new rules that restrict the States' margin for manoeuvre and/or overload them with obligations, 
especially in emergency situations. And we must  make use of existing structures, such as specific 
committees, to address trade concerns. In Argentina's view, the WTO could emphasize that this type 
of measure, if deemed necessary, should be specific, proportionate, transparent, temporary and 
consistent with existing rules.  
5.125.   Regarding coherence and regulatory cooperation intended to simplify technical regulations, 
conformity procedures and standards and thus facilitate trade flow of medical supplies needed to 
tackle the pandemic, we understand that these a re complex issues that are being handled by 
specialized technical bodies. To that effect, the WTO could encourage the development of Members' 
regulatory capacity and promote better practices in terms of minimum standards of quality, through 
the Members' co mmitment to put their best foot forward in this respect, allowing each national 
jurisdiction to act in accordance with its regulations and public health standards.   WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 46 - 
 
  5.126.   As for the temporary reduction of tariffs, that is a right that States can choose to exerci se 
or not, according to their strategies, priorities and needs in overcoming an emergency such as this 
one. We must be careful about imposing permanent measures that are directly and essentially 
related to public health policy. Again, we believe that each country has the means to decide for itself 
whether or not such temporary reductions are suitable. We shouldn't impose measures that restrict 
their margin for manoeuvre.  
5.127.   In short, we understand the importance of removing obstacles in order to expediate the 
production of essential medical goods, but that alone will not solve the problem of fair access. From 
experience, we know that vaccine production increased dramatically, but did not result in equitable 
distribution. Manufacturing and distribu tion were channelled to a specific group of countries that are 
now administering booster shots, while other countries are still waiting for enough vaccines to 
administer the first dose.  
5.128.   Other issues, which are directly related to equitable access, should b e addressed in a holistic 
response to the pandemic, whether as an immediate outcome or as part of subsequent work. Such 
issues include technology transfer, decentralization of production, distribution challenges in lower 
income countries, support for WHO m echanisms and initiatives, the role of the private sector, trade 
contract transparency and COVID vaccines being regarded as global public goods.  
5.129.   We therefore hope to promptly and jointly begin working on the response that the whole 
world is awaiting of thi s Organization.  
5.130.   The representative of Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
5.131.   On the first subitem, we would like to thank you Chair for your tireless efforts that allowed 
us to launch the discussion on a draft Ministerial Declaration. The dr aft preamble presented this 
week is now being carefully examined by our team, but at a first glance it looks quite logical and 
balanced. We are looking forward to further working on the basis of this draft , as well as moving to 
next parts of the declaratio n. My advice to other delegations - based on what we heard at the 
consultations earlier this week - would be not to overload the preamble by ideas which would better 
feed into the political signals section.  
5.132.   On the third subitem, we wish to praise the work  of Ambassador Walker and thank him for 
his report. In my view, it duly and scrupulously reflects all views, ideas and reservations expressed 
by interested Members during last week's consultations, including those delivered by Russia. In fact, 
from the beg inning we had no doubt about Ambassador Walker's capacity as a fair broker in this 
delicate exercise. Now the task is to promptly bring all those ideas into a single document. At the 
informal Ministerial meeting in Paris there was a general convergence of views that the COVID 
response paper should be among the main outcomes at MC12. This should inspire us not to leave 
the finalisation of this document for the last moment in spite the fact that, of course, the IP topic is 
still quite difficult and there is a  need for more efforts to get an agreement on that. We are looking 
forward to further work under the chairmanship of Ambassador Walker. My only request would be 
to duly coordinat e holding all these meetings and consultations , and also take into account the  
intensive schedule of main negotiating tracks , especially if these consultations will require the 
presence of Heads of Delegation, although I understand that it can be unavoidable.  
5.133.   We had yesterday an informal session on the logistics for MC12. This is al so quite an 
important topic. I will not go into the details of our concerns regarding what we heard yesterday but 
I think we should have a chance to discuss this in detail in order to better understand how to prepare 
our capital -based teams.  
5.134.   The representa tive of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
5.135.   Regarding the MC12 Outcome Document , we wish to highlight a few points on the 
arrangements for MC12 and the outcome document. We thank the MC12 Task Force for the 
presentation and information provided to the delegates at yesterday 's information meeting on 
logistics and organisation and thank the D irector -General  for the information provided  so far . 
5.136.   While we now have some more details, it appears that the event organization is premised 
on the as sumption that the current situation vis -à-vis the pandemic in Switzerland will continue to WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 47 - 
 
  prevail, which we also hope to be the case. However, given the vast expanse of the event, and the 
unpredictability of the situation, several scenarios are possible a nd must be accounted for. For 
instance, we must be sure and prepared on what to do in case of a likely outbreak during or before 
the event particularly at the MC12 venues, for example. We are still unsure on how delegations could 
effectively participate at  the MC if they have to quarantine due to a positive COVID test. At the same 
time, while we appreciate the health measures to keep delegates safe, we feel that the testing 
facilities in Geneva may be limited for a such a large event, the costs of testing a re also an element 
of concern and needs consideration.  
5.137.   In addition, travel restrictions, and complicated traveling routes and conditions particularly 
for small and distant Members are causing much angst among those delegations. Presently, there 
are several  countries that face flight restrictions and quarantine requirements during transit. It would 
be very concerning if they cannot participate in the Conference. Since they are unpredictable, any 
new travel restrictions closer to the event, could further curt ail participation of Members. These are 
serious concerns that would need to be addressed to ensure the inclusive and effective participation 
of all delegations at the conference.  
5.138.   Turning to the Outcome Document, we have heard several Members in the TNC the  other 
day, calling for a balanced outcome that caters in particular to the needs and sensitivities of 
developing countries. We have also highlighted elements of such an outcome earlier today and in 
various previous interventions in different meetings. Dev elopment remains a key deliverable that 
must be reinforced in our negotiated outcomes and reiterated as a treaty embedded right. 
Implementation of past decisions and mandates would be essential for a successful outcome. At the 
same time, a comprehensive, m eaningful, and effective response to COVID -19 and its challenges 
incorporating a temporary waiver from certain TRIPS obligations would be integral.  These are some 
of the basic and necessary elements. We will continue to work constructively with you and the  
Membership to deliver on such a balanced outcome.  
5.139.   Regarding the W ork Programme on Electronic Commerce , I would like to address this item 
under Agenda item 6 which addresses the same subject.  
5.140.   Regarding the WTO Response to the Pandemic , we thank Ambassado r Walker for his efforts 
as Facilitator. At the outset, we wish to recall our statement made under Agenda item 4 on the TRIPS 
waiver earlier today. It is an extremely important issue. The pandemic is far from over. The longer 
we go without a meaningful sol ution, the more we allow those challenges to mount and give rise to 
new ones. Pakistan has therefore been very actively engaged in the process. We hope to continue 
our work with the Facilitator and other Members to find a meaningful, credible and useful ou tcome 
for the world. At the same time, our response must be mindful of the grounds we lay for future work 
after MC12.  
5.141.   In this regard, it would be useful to start clarifying the exact nature of the outcome on the 
pandemic response, and how we envisage any post MC12 work on pandemic and crisis preparedness 
in relation to our existing mandates and commitments, which are largely unfulfilled in the 
developmental context. Thus, we are concerned that any outcome should not undermine the capacity 
of the WTO to del iver on existing mandates which are important for developing countries and LDCs 
and should not marginalize the work that is necessary for delivering meaningfully on those issues, 
particularly under the Doha work programme.  
5.142.   On the immediate response, the gl obal nature of this pandemic needs a global response 
where we exhaust all available avenues and means to overcome the present situation. We note and 
appreciate the efforts of the DG in this regard. However, we are increasingly coming to the conclusion 
that the promises from the business -as-usual approaches, and a reiteration of existing trade policy 
and IP provisions is severely inadequate to address the pandemic and does not constitute any 
meaningful response.  
5.143.   Where our organization , through the TRIPS and  other Agreements, has promised and 
ensures the protection of private property rights, there is nothing in our commitments to impose 
reciprocal obligations on the IP holders who enjoy that protection – particularly in emergencies where 
human lives are at s take. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 48 - 
 
  5.144.   At the moment, till the establishment of a lasting solution that embeds those obligations on 
public and private spheres globally, Pakistan sees a temporary waiver from certain TRIPS obligations 
as the only meaningful way to address the immediate prob lem, especially for the scaling up of 
production of vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics and to provide their equitable and affordable 
access to everyone across the globe – a vision expressed by our Prime Minister at the World Health 
Assembly very early into the pandemic. Therefore, a response to the pandemic must incorporate in 
it as an integral component, the TRIPS Waiver to make it meaningful and useful.  Pakistan will 
continue to engage constructively on this issue and seek to contribute submissions in  the best 
possible manner to assist a useful outcome.  
5.145.   The representative of Tunisia  delivered the following statement:  
5.146.   We congratulate you, Chair, on your extensive reports on preparations for MC12, as well as 
your inclusive and transparent approach to making strides in key negotiating subjects. To be concise, 
I will say that my delegation agrees with the general agreement priorities for MC12, which will shortly 
be communicated, as announced by H.E. Ambassador of Mauritius. At the risk of rep eating myself, 
at this stage, I will simply comment on the WTO response to the pandemic. I will state my 
delegation's position on point (b) on e -commerce at the consideration of Item 6 of the agenda.  
5.147.   Indeed, engaging in collective thinking on an effective and fair WTO response to strengthen 
the global supply chain for medical products and vaccines remains a key shared responsibility. If we 
had to keep only one outcome of MC12, this would, indeed, be the one to retain. We welcome, in 
this respect, Ambassador  Walker's efforts in the process on the WTO response to the pandemic and 
we also congratulate ourselves on the initiatives concluded between international organizations, 
including the WTO, in this area and we reiterate the steadfast commitment of Tunisia t o making the 
most of its productive capacity in the pharmaceutical industry.  
5.148.   When the Head of Government of Tunisia visited the WTO last June, Tunisia expressed in 
this matter its high -level commitment to being actively involved in the course advocated by the 
Director -General, which aims to make full use of production capacity in many developing countries 
in order to increase global production of vaccines and enhance the capacity of the global health 
system to respond to future pandemics. We remain committe d to such multilateral cooperation, 
coordinated by the WTO, to make this shared determination a reality in the field.  
5.149.   The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
5.150.   Thank you, General Council Chair, for the MC12 outcome document. We view  that at this 
critical stage, it is paramount to focus on the substance in order to ensure the WTO could deliver a 
credible outcome. We must aim to finalise our work as much as we can ahead of MC12, so that our 
Ministers will not be overwhelmed with all th e technical issues. We must bear in mind that a last-
minute  negotiation is a recipe for disaster. Through these challenging times, we must continue to 
engage constructively and demonstrate flexibility to resolve all the outstanding issues for MC12.  
5.151.   We welc ome the report by the Chair on the work undertaken relating to the Work Programme 
on Electronic Commerce. We continue to support the discussions at the working group and share 
the view that discussions on e -commerce at the WTO level would send a positive s ignal to the 
business community at large.  
5.152.   In addition, Malaysia appreciates efforts by Members to engage in the meaningful 
discussions to further discuss the E-commerce Moratorium issues. We believe that there has been 
significant effort by Members in other international organisations, that could assist in providing 
better understanding and possible solutions to the moratorium issue. We are also pleased to note 
that there have been constructive discussions in the JSI on e -commerce, which could be taken into 
consideration, in reinvigorating the Work Programme on E-commerce.  
5.153.   On the WTO 's response to the COVID -19 pandemic, Malaysia appreciates all the necessary 
measures that facilitate the increased production and movement of essential medical goods. We 
commend the good work of Ambassador Walker 's role  as facilitator for the WTO 's response to the 
pandemic. We view that there is room for us to expand the measures , including the elements related 
to intellectual property. As time is of the essence, rest assured, Malaysia will continue to support 
work towar ds the possible delivery for an outcome in this area at MC12.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 49 - 
 
  5.154.   The representative of Honduras  delivered the following statement:  
5.155.   We thank you for your efforts in relation to the outcome document for the Twelfth Ministerial 
Conference and the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce.  
5.156.   Turning to the response to the pandemic, we welcome the report by the Facilitator, 
Ambassador David Walker, as well as the efforts undertaken on this important matter, which is a 
priority for all Members of this Organization. We al so thank the co -sponsors of document 
WT/GC/W/826 for raising awareness of what is occurring in the Latin American region and across 
the world, particularly with regard to the issues that developing countries are facing in terms of 
equitable access to vacci nes.  
5.157.   The WTO's response must be focused on immediate action that facilitates trade in health 
services and goods, thereby aiding our nations' economic recovery.  This is a matter of global public 
interest and we must therefore ensure that vaccines are distributed effectively and that all Members 
have equitable access to the required medical inputs and vaccines. To that end, we reiterate that a 
discussion followed up by a concrete action plan is no longer an option, but a necessity.  
5.158.   The representative of Jamaica, on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
5.159.   On behalf of the ACP Group, I use this opportunity to welcome and thank the Honourable 
Mawine Diggs, Minister of Commerce and Industry of Liberia for her comment. First, we also thank  
and commend you, Chair, for your efforts and commitments in preparing some solid outcomes at 
MC12.  
5.160.   As regards subitem A., we look forward to having a declaration for MC12. This is a priority 
for the ACP Group. We have not had a declaration since 2015. We  believe that it is necessary to 
have political guidance for our work in Geneva, especially given the unprecedented environment in 
which the multilateral trading system currently operates. A declaration should be comprehensive 
and address all areas of conc erns to the Members. The Group acknowledges that there are 
sensitivities, but we believe that it is possible to accomplish this goal in a balanced and nuanced 
manner that attracts the buy in of all Members. Chair, taking into account your vast experience, and 
despite the Membership's dynamic approaches to the various issues on the table, we have confidence 
in your ability to prepare a draft declaration for our deliberation. We have limited time left before 
MC12 and therefore hope that we can make good progr ess as soon as possible.  
5.161.   On subitem B. regarding the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, this is of critical 
importance to our Group as we see it as a vital tool in addressing the digital divide within and among 
countries as well as to ensure that our entrepreneurs, especially small businesses, can tap into the 
potential of global trade. We fully support the renewal of the Work Programme and urge the 
Membership to endorse its renewal. We need to focus on how we can reinvigorate the work 
programme. Given  our specific interests on the development dimension of this long -standing area 
of work in the multilateral framework of the WTO, the Group believes that MC12 provides an avenue 
to pursue these objectives.  
5.162.   On subitem C., the ACP Group thanks the facilitat or for updating us on his work regarding 
the WTO's response to the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic. His reporting suggests that we are 
making good progress in our work and the Group wishes to commend delegations on their 
collaborative spirit in recognition  of the importance of a result in this area, that is a credible WTO 
response. For us, the WTO has an important role to play in complementing the work of the 
international organizations and other stakeholders in respect of responding to the impact of the 
pandemic from health stabilisation, recovery and sustainable rebuilding perspectives. We do 
anticipate that Ministers will be able to use MC12 to effectively guide the organization on how to 
achieve this. For this to happen, however, the onus is on us , Ambas sadors in Geneva, to make the 
necessary preparations so that solid, relevant and appropriate recommendations can be put to our 
Ministers to facilitate the decision.  
5.163.   We expect that the Facilitator process will not only stabilise, recover and rebuild, but a lso 
leave us with a blueprint relating to how we respond to future international crises. We believe that, 
as an outcome, this process should assist with, from a trade policy perspective, (i) the availability WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 50 - 
 
  of vaccines, diagnostics and other medical suppl ies to prevent, treat and contain the spread of the 
virus - this is where we believe a consensual outcome on the TRIPS waiver is critical; (ii) fostering 
the WTO's collaboration with other international stakeholders; (iii) monitoring pandemic -related 
trade  measures; (iv) preserving global supply chains and trade logistics and smoothen the flow of 
goods and services; (v) addressing the issue of pandemic -induced food and livelihood security, 
including rising costs of food globally; (vi) streamlining the WTO's  response into the work programme 
of WTO Committees, Working Groups and Councils; (vii) ensuring that debt and limited access to 
finance do not occasion a contraction of global trade ; and (viii) ensuring that the WTO's experience 
with the management around  the pandemic allows for the creation of a blueprint to respond to future 
crises with similar impacts. The ACP Group will continue to support the process of the Facilitator with 
a view to a decision by MC12.  
5.164.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
5.165.   Under the first subitem, l et me, first, reiterate our strong and long -standing commitment to 
the multilateral trading system. We fully support the much -needed  reforms to modernize and 
revitalize the WTO. MC12 is a stepping -stone in tha t process of reform and of strengthening the 
Organization.  As my Foreign Minister, Ambassador Carlos França, has clearly expressed this week 
at the WTO Mini Ministerial in Paris, there are 4 elements we should consider for a MC12 package:  
5.166.   Fisheries, in whi ch we must move to the end -game and start real negotiations that can lead 
us to conclude an agreement with the highest component of sustainability. It will show that the WTO 
can deal with pressing current issues such as the intersection between trade and s ustainability. If 
we are not able to reach an agreement by MC12, we need to be realistic about the prospects of the 
dossier at the WTO. Not only it will send a negative message about our collective will to deal with 
the new reality of trade, but it will re quire an explanation on why we couldn 't agree to curb subsidies 
to IUU fishing after 20 years of negotiations.  
5.167.   Regarding Trade and Health, once again we need to show the relevance of international 
trade and WTO rules when facing the challenges posed by cur rent and future pandemics. We 
welcome the work carried out by Ambassador Walker and the recent US conceptual document on 
Trade and Health, as they complement the Ottawa Group 's Trade and Health Initiative.  
5.168.   Agriculture remains the key issue for Brazil. We need international trade and WTO rules 
more than ever, as these are vital components to address the global challenges of food security and 
sustainability. Food security is about availability and access to food, and international trade plays a 
fundamental r ole in that equation. Establishing a process to update the agriculture rulebook on 
domestic support, enhancing the work of the SPS Committee, and looking into the future of 
agriculture trade and sustainability are all vital components of a package. Efforts  to roll -back 
commitments in Agriculture, to create new barriers to trade disguised as environmental protection, 
or to legitimize distortive subsidies via instruments such as PSH, however, are deal breakers for 
Brazil.  
5.169.   Finally, on institutional reform, we need to launch negotiations at MC12 aimed at restoring 
the functionality and full effectiveness of the dispute settlement system before MC13, as well as at 
exploring the pathway that leads to plurilateral negotiations at the WTO.  
5.170.   Regarding the second subi tem, Brazil supports the renewal of the Work Programme on 
Electronic Commerce and the moratorium on electronic transactions at the next Ministerial 
Conference (MC12).  
5.171.   Regarding the Structured Discussions on the impacts of the moratorium, Brazil believes t hat 
it has produced valuable information, both during the dedicated workshop in July 2020 and through 
the communications from Members to the General Council on this issue.  In the perspective of our 
tax authorities, the moratorium on the imposition of custo ms duties on electronic transmissions has 
not produced, on the one hand, an important fiscal impact in Brazil. On the other hand, its 
discontinuation, after more than 20 years in force, would strongly affect the digital economy, in 
Brazil and globally. Fur thermore, the eventual discontinuation of the moratorium would send a very 
negative political message about the WTO to the world.  Brazil is open to continue discussions on this 
issue and any other topic of the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce.  Brazil is ready to WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 51 - 
 
  collaborate in constructive ways in order to ensure the continuation both of the Work Programme 
and the moratorium.  
5.172.   The representative of Vanuatu, on behalf of the Pacific Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
5.173.   I thank you Chair for the repo rts of the MC12 outcomes document and the Work Programme 
on E-commerce, on behalf of the Pacific Group we also thank Ambassador Walker for his report on 
his work on the WTO's response to the pandemic. On the MC12 outcomes document, the Pacific 
Group suppor ts the proposed structure comprising the text to the Ministerial Decisions and the post 
MC12. You will recall from yesterday one of the Pacific Island countries made a statement regarding 
the participation of Ministers to the MC12 because of the very big d ifficulties we are facing to move 
up from our countries and to move back into our countries because of the COVID -19 restrictions in 
place. So, whether Vanuatu and other Pacific countries will attend MC12 is a question that needs to 
be answered as soon as w e receive response from the WTO on whether some of the delegations can 
attend by virtual means.  
5.174.   On the Work Programme on E-commerce, we support the reinvigoration of the Work 
Programme, to focus on addressing the digital divide, we support the extension o f the Work 
Programme and the moratorium at MC12.  
5.175.   On the WTO response to the pandemic, we take note of the progress and support the work 
that has been undertaken . We must say again that the WTO must play its part to contribute trade 
tools as part of the global solutions to the pandemic. The WTO response must address both current 
and future pandemics through the use of instruments in the WTO, which includes prompt not ification 
to ensure transparency of trade measures imposed by Members, trade facilitation to ensure efficient 
distribution of essential medical goods, standards to address requirements  of vaccines and vaccines 
certificates and disciplines on export restric tions to ensure that import dependent Members such as 
those of the Pacific Group are taken into account. We are open to engage in discussions in this work.  
5.176.   The representative of Turkey  delivered the following statement:  
5.177.   Regarding the  WTO Response to the Pandemic , I would like to thank Ambassador Walker for 
his report.  While discussing our response to the pandemic, the underlying logic should always be 
pragmatism. The new variants, together with an unequal distribution of vaccines and scarcity of 
them, necessitate actions with a sense of urgency and for the benefit of our people.  On our side, 
since the outbreak of the pandemic, Turkey has done its best to help others and provided medical 
aid to 159 countries and 12 organizations. Our Pr esident declared at the UN General Assembly that 
in the near future we will offer our national vaccine, TURKOVAC, to the benefit of all humanity.  
5.178.   The pandemic has also shown that trade is a significant tool for ensuring adequate and swift 
access to the go ods and services in times of public health crises. Most of the countries that had to 
resort to temporary measures have already terminated them to ensure functioning supply chains. 
Turkey has also terminated its measures on what was already a very limited n umber of products. 
The Committee on Market Access is keeping track of these measures - both restrictive and facilitati ng 
- and reports them to WTO members. In this sense, we believe that the WTO provides us a valuable 
toolbox in keeping track of trade -related measures taken in response to C OVID -19 and in fact fulfils  
a significant mission.  
5.179.   Trade facilitation is one of the priorities for Turkey in response to the pandemic. Accelerating 
the simplified and timely release of goods is a practical step and criti cal during a pandemic. Turkey 
co-sponsors a proposal to that effect to accelerate the implementation of the TFA and enhance 
communication, cooperation and automation in border operations. This is a very promising area that 
may yield fruitful and immediate results.   
5.180.   We believe that while engaging in this delicate nexus of trade and health in terms of further 
rulemaking , we should make sure that our approach is inclusive, it provides necessary policy space 
and does not result in alienating countries from the multilateral trading system.  In conclusion, since 
we are faced with a global pandemic and naturally looking for a multilateral response, our work in 
this Organization should be inclusive and on a multilateral footing as well.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 52 - 
 
  5.181.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
5.182.   Thank you for the reports and efforts. With respect to the response to the pandemic, we 
thank Ambassador Walker for his detailed report and appreciate his efforts in carrying out a series 
of consultations in September. There are two points I would like to highlight here. First, we must 
have concrete deliverables by MC12 as WTO's response to the pandemic, as the pandemic has been 
there for almost 2 years. If the WTO cannot take concrete and detailed action at t his critical time by 
MC12 how people can be convinced that the WTO can deliver in the coming years. Second, for those 
we cannot finish by MC12 , we support to establish a Work Programme which has clear timelines and 
objectives relying on the existing struct ure of the WTO with the ad hoc task force as a coordinating 
body.  
5.183.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
5.184.   First, we would like to express our appreciation to you for your tireless efforts in consulting 
with Members and also to Am bassador David Walker for his comprehensive update. I will address 
all three subitems in Agenda item 5 together. First, the Ministerial Declaration, which you have 
proposed, will be a time -consuming exercise and we must ensure that the outcomes are 
commens urate with our efforts. Given the limited time left to MC12 and the plethora of outstanding 
issues left on the table we need to ensure that the substance of the Ministerial Declaration will be 
meaningful and substantive. What does that mean? I think we sho uld start with the audience in 
mind and understand what they are looking for, given that there has been four years since the last 
Ministerial Conference the declaration should acknowledge the seismic changes that  have occurred 
including the COVID -19 pandem ic, the rapid pace of digital transformations and the challenges of 
climate change and sustainability. It should provide a clear indication that the WTO remains relevant, 
and more importantly, it is forward looking. Otherwise, like what DG Ngozi said in la st week's TNC 
our stakeholders will simply take their business elsewhere and relegate the WTO to irrelevance.  
5.185.   Second, Singapore attaches equal importance to the E -commerce Work Programme and the 
moratorium on custom duties on electronic transmissions. The y represent equally useful pathways 
that enable the WTO to remain at the forefront in shaping global trade discourse . Singapore firmly 
supports the extension of the moratorium on custom duties on electronic transmissions. On the E -
commerce Work Programme, Singapore welcomes any discussion or ideas on how we can deepen 
the existing technical work in areas of interest under the various Committees. Third, it will be vital 
to deliver a robust WTO response to the COVID -19 pandemic at MC12. Reflecting the importa nce of 
this issue, Members have tabled various proposals at the WTO, this includes the TRIPS Waiver 
proposal, by India and South Africa, the Trade and Health Initiative that has been co -sponsored by 
52 Members as well as several other proposals from the Eu ropean Union, Chinese Taipei, and the 
United States. If I may use the analogy of a buffet, Members are presented with a wide array of 
dishes and making the right choice of what to pick for the plate can be challenging. Some dishes 
may look delicious and te mpting but they may not be the best for our health, others may look dull 
and boring but are nutritious and build up our resistance to attacks by viruses. The secret to good 
health is to have a balanced diet. In the same way, WTO Members must carefully exam ine the 
different proposals on the table and identify those elements that are pragmatic and capable of 
gathering broad support. To help us make the right choices, and taking the analogy a step further, 
we actually have a dietitian in the person of Ambassad or David Walker who is facilitating the process 
to help Members select the right dishes from the buffet table. Hence, he must strike for a balanced 
outcome that will nourish and build up the WTO so that we will be ready for MC12 and beyond.  
5.186.   The representat ive of Sri Lanka  delivered the following statement:   
5.187.   Regarding the format of MC12, Sri Lanka has concerns on the suggested hybrid format MC12 
(in-person and virtual). The concern is that absentee Ministers will be made to virtually participate 
in the meeti ng, which may suggest that even though the meeting is not officially held in hybrid 
format, it is going to be held in that format.  At yesterday 's meeting, it has been confirmed that MC12 
will be held in hybrid format. Only the delegates who will be physica lly present will be able to take 
the floor. However, there was an indication that special situations would be taken into account.  
Furthermore, WTO Members have already been informed by the Chair of the fisheries subsidies 
negotiations that negotiators part icipating virtually (e.g. from capital because they do not have a 
mission in Geneva) in those negotiations are only allowed to listen and not speak or make proposals.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 53 - 
 
  5.188.   With the decision of the WTO Secretariat to hold the MC12 in -person and the delegation si ze 
is limited to four people, it does not say that there will be a hybrid option for virtual participation by 
those who cannot attend in person.  At MC12, when you have to deal with many parallel negotiating 
forums on many key issues how can we manage with four delegates, which also includes your Head 
of Delegation, if the delegates attending the meeting in virtual format cannot make the interventions, 
how can we get ourselves involved and become a part of parcel of the decisions being taken. 
Therefore , it is a well -founded concern that developing countries/LDCs for example because 
commercial flights to their country have been stopped due to COVID , etc., will be left listening only 
in a hybrid MC12. Since silence constitutes consent under footnote 1 of the Marrakesh Agreement, 
this would make it very difficult for some developing countries and LDCs to adequately protect their 
interests with the relevant e xpertise from capital during MC12.  
5.189.   The time zone factor: An entirely virtual MC12 could not be a negotiating Ministerial for a 
number of reasons including that  WTO Members are spread across 18 time zones so it is difficult for 
all Ministers to participate at the same time, as we found it during the fisheries subsidies Ministerial 
Conference held in July 2021.Not all WTO Members have fast enough and reliable enough internet 
to be able to negotiate in real time (including seeing video of any projected negotia ting text etc). 
Have all WTO Members been consulted as to whether their internet is fast enough and reliable 
enough for a virtual or hybrid MC12? Did they all say their internet is satisfactory enabling them to 
participate effectively at MC12?  
5.190.   We also shar e the similar and related concerns expressed by the Members who had taken 
the floor before me which warrant serious attention of the members as well as the Secretariat before 
we proceed further with the decision to hold the MC12 in hybrid format,   
5.191.   On Agend a item 5 .C on the processes that are ongoing for WTO Response to the Pandemic , 
we appreciate your efforts as well as the efforts being made by Ambassador David Walker, Facilitator 
for the WTO response to the pandemic and the reports presented by you and Am bassador Walker 
at the informal and formal G eneral Council  meetings.  
5.192.   Today we listened to the oral report presented by Ambassador Walker, which I found to be 
very informative and entails very pertinent issues related to the kind of responses that are usef ul 
for the ongoing pandemic and also future pandemics. Recently a number of countries have flagged 
the high cost of freight and other logistics cost that are significantly hampering the distribution of 
essential goods and this particularly being experience d by small countries. We sought D irector -
General' s intervention in addressing these concerns and we also feel that some course of actions 
could be explored under the discussions being undertaken under the Ambassador Walker process. 
In this connection, we a lso welcome proposals from the U nited States and India for their proposals 
which are being analysed  by capitals carefully. Also wish to appreciate the Secretariat documents 
compiled covering Global Cooperative Initiatives on the Response to COVID -19 and Fu ture 
Pandemics.  
5.193.   We also fully share the Members ' view who believed that ongoing two parallel tracks in 
relation to the prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19 pandemic through a possible 
waiver of I ntellectual Property Rights and trade and healt h. It is essential these two tracks are 
converged at one point to deliver meaningful outcomes as we believe that delivery on this important 
item is a prerequisite for a successful outcome at MC12. What we have noticed - there is a long 
pause in between the  reports being presented to us by you and Ambassador Walker on the progress 
in relation to the discussion being taken under the various thematic sessions.  
5.194.   This possesses significant difficulties to small delegations such as mine, who do not 
participate at  these close door discussions, as we lack the information on the pertinent issues raised 
and discussed by the Members. We therefore urge you to address this situation and wish to suggest 
that at least brief notes compiled under the Facilitator 's responsibi lity are shared at regular intervals 
with other delegations who are not invited and do not participate at the sessions.  
5.195.   On Agenda item 5 .B and Agenda item 6, my delegation wishes to reiterate its statements 
made and positions elaborated in the previous G eneral Council  meetings as well as at G eneral Council  
Chair 's consultations , which  took place under different configurations.  We stress that re -
consideration of the moratorium is critical for developing countries to preserve policy space to WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 54 - 
 
  regulate imports , generate revenue through a simple and direct instrument such as customs duties 
and achieve digital industrialization.   
5.196.   Based on the identification of a small number of digitizable goods in five areas, UNCTAD has 
estimated a loss in tariff revenue of more  than $10 billion per annum globally because of the 
moratorium, 95 per cent of which is borne by developing countries, including Sri Lanka.  It is also to 
be borne in mind that this calculation does not include custom surcharges (CESS), Other Duties & 
Charg es, and Internal Taxes. When we consider that Customs duties on electronic transmissions 
cover, not only digitised and digitizable  goods, but also digitally transmitted services, the negative 
impact of continuing with the moratorium on developing countries  would be even greater.  According 
to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources, 
revenue generated from Customs and other import duties in Sri Lanka is reported at 19.08% of 
overall tax revenue in 2019,  which indicates its bias towards more outward trade. Sri Lanka is a net 
importer of E lectronic Transmission  products and as revealed in the UNCTAD study, the 
corresponding Sri Lanka' s per annum tariff revenue loss of the Moratorium on imposition of custom s 
duties on E lectronic Transmission  items is USD 10 Million, this comes to around 2% of Sri Lanka' s 
total revenue from customs duties alone in 2019.  
5.197.   The proponents state that there will be significant gains and benefits for developing countries 
through the continuation of the moratorium , but they continue to fail to address concerns of the 
developing countries with respect to the importance of preserving their policy space. Customs duties 
are used by countries to support nascent domestic industri es, regulate an unwanted surge in imports 
and facilitate industrialization. Countries like Sri Lanka need policy and fiscal space in the digital 
economy so that they can develop their digital competencies in their own space and provide a level 
playing fiel d to their infant digital sectors. The development experience of nearly all countries across 
the world makes it evident that tariffs are amongst the most effective policy tools for achieving these 
objectives. Customs duties have been resorted to by develop ed countries to provide protection to 
their industry and to enable them to become internationally competitive. It is only fair that the 
developing world be given a similar opportunity. Thus, retaining the policy space to impose customs 
duties becomes an im portant objective in itself.  
5.198.   The absence of a shared and common understanding on the scope and definition of electronic 
transmissions will make a decision on the extension of the moratorium a challenge at MC12. It is 
therefore extremely important to have s tructured and focused discussions under the Work 
Programme on E-commerce, so as to remedy the unsustainable inequities and broaden the benefits 
from growing e -commerce.  Sri Lanka has high expectations for MC12 in this regard. It is important 
that WTO Membe rs share their know -how to bridge the digital divide and facilitate digital technology 
transfers.  
5.199.   Sri Lanka stands ready to engage meaningfully and constructively towards the collaborative 
formulation of the mutually agreeable recommendation on the morato rium for the consideration of 
Ministers in MC12, and needs assurances from Members, particularly the ones who are ready to 
address the concerns of developing countries.  
5.200.   The representative of Dominican  Republic  delivered the following statement:  
5.201.   We welcome your report on point A and endorse the statement made by the Ambassador of 
Mexico. The outcome document should make reference to the health crisis and economic recovery.  
5.202.   On point B , we support the statement made by the Ambassador of Jamaica on behalf of the 
ACP Group.  
5.203.   On point C , I would like to state that the health crisis created by the COVID -19 pandemic is 
not over, millions of individuals have died and tens of thousands are doing so every day. Whilst the 
vaccines and some treatments which h ave been highly effective in the prevention or treatment of 
this disease continue to be outside the reach of whole sways of the global population. As said by the 
President of the Dominican Republic, at the recent summit of Heads of States of America, "some  
countries have adopted policies which unfortunately are unfairly limiting access to vaccines and 
medications for low - and middle -income countries in contradiction with any notion of human 
solidarity". The COVAX mechanism has been affected by the situation , and we find ourselves walking WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 55 - 
 
  towards a seriously limited Ministerial Conference in terms of its format because of these 
circumstances.  
5.204.   The Dominican Republic cosponsored at the last meeting of the General Council , alongside 
other Members of the region , document WT/GC/W/826, which stipulates that the WTO may and 
should play a primordial role in the recovery of global trade during this crisis and the post -pandemic 
period, and so we need to, as soon as possible, remove any trade obstacles that impede acces s to 
vaccines against COVID -19. Importing countries of vaccines and their components should be able to 
participate in discussions in a representative and significant fashion because of the global dimension 
of the issue and the differentiated impact that it  has had in the various regions.  
5.205.   The Dominican Republic would like to welcome the solidarity shown by some countries who 
have made donations of thousands of doses of vaccines and making them more accessible, but we 
understand that the major contribution t o be made by this Organization in the next Ministerial 
Conference would be the adoption of a temporary waiver for intellectual property rights. We have 
closely listened to arguments against which come from States which note that a waiver would not 
have an increase in production as an outcome but rather could in fact disincentivize innovation and 
investment in pharmaceutical products. Colleagues, if innovation and investment in health is going 
to exclusively depend on economic incentives from the largest pro ducers then the majority of 
humanity will remain unprotected while the majority of these businesses will be operating as 
monopolies and will be using prices that do not correspond to production costs. The temporary 
exemptions for intellectual property righ ts would allow countries who have the capacity to produce 
vaccines to do so and third States could have the option to acquire these at more affordable prices, 
measures that would allow us to save thousands of lives and put an end to the pandemic. The virus  
has shown, and this has been repeated, that we cannot turn the page until all of us are protected. 
The virus does not need a Ministerial resolution to allow it to mutate and to survive. We, however, 
are those who need to mutate in order to hold a successf ul Ministerial.  
5.206.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
5.207.   On item 5. A, we appreciate your efforts in leading the drafting process for the MC12 outcome 
document and various reports in a transparent and inclusive manner.  I will briefly touch upon political 
messages.  In our view, the political messages being elaborated in the document is of highest 
importance, not merely to remind ourselves of our tasks and goals, but also to inform the world 
about our joint commitments as to  how to make this organization 's work serv e as solutions for the 
challenges the whole humanity is facing. The political messages guide our practices for the years to 
come and will serve as the foundation for our future work.  
5.208.   We support the Chair's plan to  emphasize the solidarity in the outcome document. We are 
of the view that the political message could also include our shared experiences arising from the 
COVID -19 pandemic. The shared experiences could reflect the fact that there is a need of collective 
action under the WTO. The political message could be strong and firm enough in confirming that 
trade and economic related measures are the crucial part to collectively address the challenges 
created by the pandemic.  
5.209.   In addition, our political message shou ld also include our commitment on sustainability, 
which is reflected in the fisheries subsidies negotiations to achieve the conservations of fisheries 
resources. This is to show to the world that the multilateral trading system is capable of making 
substan tial contribution. Also, the political message could include re -confirming that the WTO will 
enhance its functions in three WTO pillars so as to ensure effective ways of addressing new 
challenges arising from economic and other developments.  
5.210.   On item 5. B, my statement is also made in relation to Agenda item 6.  Concerning the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce, we appreciate the G eneral Council  Chair's leadership in the 
consultations. We fully support the continued discussions in the relevant WTO Committee s on the E-
commerce Work Program me in accordance with the December 2019 G eneral Council  Decision 
(WT/L/1079) to explore various topics and cross -cutting issues. In addition, we are of the view that 
the current effort at the E-commerce JSI to seek for formu lating a high standard discipline on e -
commerce is a complementary track to boost digital trade and bridge the digital divide.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 56 - 
 
  5.211.   Concerning the E -commerce Moratorium, we would like to stress that the priority at this 
stage should be to maintain the 22 -year-old practice of not imposing customs duties on cross -border 
electronic transmissions , and the E-commerce Moratorium should include the 'contents ' transmitted. 
From the overall economic perspective, the significant benefit from the moratorium to the SMEs and  
MSMEs and to the growth of the global ICT sector and digital economy has been self -evident.  
5.212.   We agree that Members should continue discussing the "scope, definition and impact of the 
moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions ". However, such  discussion should not 
be a condition for a Ministers ' decision on extending the moratorium. Time will not wait for us to 
make new rules especially during the pandemic. With less than two months to go before MC12, we 
support that Members should start worki ng on a Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on E -
commerce, in which Ministers agree to continue and reinvigorate the Work Programme, and to 
maintain the practice of not imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions.  
5.213.   On item 5. C, we thank Ambas sador Walker for his hard work and the detailed report which 
comprehensively covers all aspects Members have expressed in the process. We also thank 
Ambassador Spencer and Ambassador Tan for their Compilation of the Elements, which serves as a 
solid basis for the Facilitator -led Discussion on the WTO's Response to the Pandemic. We also align 
ourselves with the statement that will be made by Canada on behalf of the Trade and Health 
Proposal 's sponsoring Members.  
5.214.   We agree that the elements suggested by the co ordinator are all important. For the next 
stage, we need to focus on drafting the detailed principles toward MC12 and beyond.  We are of the 
view that the WTO response to COVID -19 and the similar public health risks of similar nature is a 
long-term task of this multilateral trading system. It needs comprehensive actions.  
5.215.   Considering the time left for us, we thought that there could be a two -stage plan. For MC12, 
we can target to have a Ministerial Declaration on WTO Response to the Pandemic to show to the  
world the political commitment and that Members give the highest priority to the WTO's response to 
COVID -19, and intend to establish a long -term and comprehensive response mechanism for the 
effective fights against the pandemic. The declaration can also s et forth some principles to address 
export restrictions, trade facilitation, logistic s and other supporting services, transparency, and 
international cooperation.  
5.216.   And at the same time, Ministers can adopt some work programs or action plans, and instruct 
their representatives to further discuss and develop needed documents. At this second stage, there 
could be different working groups to address different issues, such as a working group on export 
restrictions, a working group on trade facilitation, etc. Depe nding on their respective discussions, 
their outcomes could take different forms. For instance, there could be a set of guidelines for export 
restrictions , some best practices for regulatory coherence , and some detailed rules on transparency. 
These activit ies are to implement the Ministerial Declaration.  
5.217.   The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement:  
5.218.   We would like to thank you, Chair, for the extensive consultation process you have led on 
the structure and content of an outcome document. We  are glad we have embarked on the text -
based process given the short time available to us. We agree that we should aim for a limited number 
of strong political messages, both in relation to the immediate challenges before us, in particular the 
pandemic, as  well as in relation to the longer -term challenges. We should remind ourselves and the 
world around us that the fundamental purpose of this organization is to contribute to a sustainable 
future, both in terms of economic, environmental and social sustainab ility.  
5.219.   The Joint Communication on Systemic Issues in WT/GC/W/827, dated 27 July and reissued 
yesterday as Rev.2, contains key messages of relevance to the political part of the outcome 
document. MC12 provides an opportunity to reaffirm the relevance of an d support for the rules -
based multilateral trading system , and secondly to underline the importance and relevance of the 
multilateral trading system in the context of the global health crisis and, third, provide a platform 
for embarking on a process for re form.  
5.220.   On item 5.B, Norway agrees that it is important to continue our dialogue on the relationship 
between development in e -commerce and we are looking forward to continuing discussions under WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 57 - 
 
  the Work Programme. At the same time, we continue to support th e Moratorium on Customs Duties 
on Electronic Transmissions as it provides predictability and certainty. Creating more uncertainty 
should not be the purpose of this organization.  
5.221.   On item 5.C, Norway associates itself with the statement to be delivered by C anada on behalf 
of the co -sponsors of the Trade and Health Initiative. We would like to thank Ambassador Walker 
for his efforts and his comprehensive report , which provides an excellent basis for our work going 
forward. We support the continuation of a dedicated workstream on the WTO's response to the 
pandemic under the leadership of Ambassador Walker , and we look forward to engaging in a text -
based process wi th the aim of agreeing on a multilaterally agreed Ministerial Declaration.   
5.222.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
5.223.   Regarding the MC12 Outcome Document, we thank you for your report on your consultations 
on a Twelfth Ministeria l Conference (MC12) outcome document and for your tireless efforts.  We 
agree that the wording should be as concise as possible, focusing on issues where we can find 
convergence.   
5.224.   The Joint Communication on Systemic Issues ( document WT/GC/W/827/Rev.2), whic h is co -
sponsored by 34 Members from different regions and different levels of development, provides 
language in support of the rules -based multilateral trading system and the need to reform the WTO.  
This document also contains language on aspects that cou ld be added to the political part of the 
Ministerial Declaration, namely work in regular bodies and negotiations, and the need for a reform 
of the WTO, including the Dispute Settlement System. We support the insertion of such language in 
the MC12 outcome d ocument.  Furthermore, Switzerland supports the inclusion of language on trade 
and climate change. Climate change is indeed one of the most acute global challenges we are facing.  
5.225.   On the WTO Response to the Pandemic, w e thank Ambassador Walker for his work a s 
Facilitator and for his report.  We also thank Canada for its remarks, which we endorse as a co -
sponsor of the Trade and Health Initiative (document WT/GC/W/823).  The work done under the 
leadership of Ambassador Walker has shown that the WTO can make an i mportant contribution to 
improving pandemic crisis management.  While this aspect has not been addressed in the context of 
the process led by Ambassador Walker, we believe that intellectual property protection also plays a 
role in the holistic approach to p andemics.  
5.226.   There is very little time left until MC12. In order to achieve the goal of a multilateral 
Ministerial Declaration on Trade and Health, it is now necessary to shift into second gear and engage 
in text based discussions. This is what Ambassador Wal ker proposes and we intend to participate 
constructively in this exercise.  
5.227.   The representative of Ecuador  delivered the following statement:  
5.228.   Thank you for the report you presented today. We trust in your skill to construct a Ministerial 
Declaration for December and we would also like to thank you for the report on electronic commerce.  
5.229.    On item 5 .C, we would like to thank Ambassador Walker as Facilitator of the pandemic 
response for the efforts made  in order to include all aspects in such a complex theme . Trade in 
services has to do with the public health of millions of people and impact s the economies and well -
being of countries. Ecuador has reiterated many times that it looks at the WTO, which is a  dynamic 
factor, a factor which will facilitate economic recovery post -pandemic , and the action of the WTO is 
directly focused on immediate emergencies in trade and public health. This is certainly a priority 
issue and it is up to all Members.  
5.230.   Ecuador has  reiterated in the General Council that any discussion on this issue must be 
inclusive, transparent and that the visions of vaccine -importing countries to combat the COVID -19 
pandemic must be reflected in the work of this Organization. Although I am speaki ng on behalf of 
my country, I must recall that on 26 July, Ecuador together with Colombia, Costa Rica, Panama and 
Dominican Republic, presented document WT/GC/W/826 on trade barriers which impede the 
importing of medicines and particularly COVID -19 medicin es and vaccines. We need to stop trade 
barriers for the import of vaccines. Vaccines are a good which most Members are net importers of . 
In Africa and Latin America we have very little access to vaccines and access to vaccines is an WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 58 - 
 
  absolute key issue. Equally important are communication matters such as transparency, 
strengthening trade regulation s and trade facilitation in health and trade. We would like to emphasize 
the need to take up issues contained in the Joint Communication , including  in the  global p andemic 
response and guaranteeing that the multilateral trading system grants all countries security, 
predictability, universal and equitable access to vaccines and other medical inputs as essential 
services to combat COVID -19.  
5.231.   The representative of Chile delivered the following statement:  
5.232.   I thank Ambassador Walker for his report and all his efforts. We are on the right track insofar 
as we maintain and reinforce positive messages and focus on areas of common ground.  We would 
like to highlight that a majori ty of delegations agree that a significant part of this deliverable pertains 
to export restrictions and similar measures, and restricted access to essential medical goods, 
including vaccines, which together with other areas of interest, have been included in Canada's Trade 
and Health Initiative, which we co -sponsor. Nevertheless, this deliverable cannot be simply 
declaratory, but rather it must establish more concrete actions that limit the field of activity in which 
Members can take these measures in times  of emergency, such as the pandemic, and that said 
restrictions be the last resort after having exhausted the less trade -distorting channels.  
5.233.   We also recognize that there is room for a solution in terms of intellectual property rights 
and greater internati onal cooperation, even between international bodies, such as the international 
financial system, as reflected by the work done by our Director -General in the last few months. 
Finally, we have had positive dialogue with the industry, which should deepen.  
5.234.   We hope that we will soon be able to begin negotiations on the basis of a draft text that the 
Facilitator would present, leading us towards an ambitious and balanced deliverable that would truly 
and effectively respond to the pandemic, while also serving as a lesson for future pandemics.  
5.235.   The representative of South Africa  provided the following statement:  
5.236.   Regarding item 5.A, w e thank you Chair for your report and the initial draft you have 
proposed to Members under your own responsibility that aims to achieve an appropriate balance.  
The context must also acknowledge that we are not building back better together - in terms of 
economic recovery and in terms of production, access and rollout of vaccines and the costs are being 
borne disproportionately by d eveloping countries, particularly in Africa.  We believe that MC12 must 
aim to preserve and strengthen an inclusive, open, transparent, fair, rules -based and development -
oriented multilateral trading system with the WTO playing the central role.  It will the refore be 
important for Ministers reaffirm the principles and objectives set out in the Marrakesh Agreement 
Establishing the World Trade Organization and re -affirm development. The system must take into 
account the interests of developing countries and LDC s for legitimacy.  
5.237.   We would like to emphasize that if we are to have a consensus document, we need to focus 
on those issues that enjoy consensus and have a multilateral mandate. We must avoid using MC12 
as a launchpad for issues that have not been properly discussed among Members and where 
consensus is not feasible.  There are genuine concerns that need further clarification in relation to 
the entry requirements, vaccination certificates, costs associated with regular testing that will have 
an impact on an in clusive participation to MC12. These warrant greater attention since participation 
is key if we are to have a balanced outcome. A hybrid approach is not a solution. We would need to 
make a call at an appropriate time on whether the conditions are ripe for an in-person meeting given 
the ever-evolving  COVID -19 situation.   
5.238.   Chair, r egarding item 5.B, it will be covered under item 6. 
5.239.   Regarding item 5.C, w e thank Ambassador Walker for his efforts in compiling this report. My 
delegation will be studying the report  in the coming days. We also thank the Ambassadors of 
Singapore and Jamaica for the valuable contributions that their delegations have made to our 
discussions. My delegation contributed constructively to all the T hematic Sessions that led to 
Ambassador  Walker's report.  
5.240.   On trade related aspects, the focus should be on high -level principles, similar to the G20, 
that measures undertaken must be temporary, targeted and proportional to the pandemic. We must WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 59 - 
 
  acknowledge countries in the context of COVID -19 that have implemented various trade facilitative 
measures which were a targeted response to the pandemic and the plan was not to lock these in the 
WTO, given the exceptional circumstances presented by the pandemic. We must therefore avoid 
one-size fits all appr oaches that would aim to convert unilateral trade facilitative and tariff 
liberalization measures implemented in the context of this crisis into permanent commitments.  
5.241.   Important missing elements in the thematic areas covered by Ambassador Walker , in our 
view, are aspects of food security and livelihoods and economic recovery which must complement 
the trade related aspects. A clear determination to develop a sustainable policy environment that 
will facilitate the development and rebuilding of industries to f oster resilience against any future 
pandemics, especially in developing countries , is critical. Economic recovery and a development -
oriented agenda will go a long way in building resilience and inclusive growth and development.  
5.242.   Finally, the biggest challen ge we face in the fight against the COVID -19 pandemic is the 
concentrated and insufficient supply of essential health technologies. A telling example is the case 
of Africa,  which relies on imports for 99% of its vaccine supply. Coupled with vaccine nationa lism, 
this strategic vulnerability has resulted in about 3% of people above the age of 12 being fully 
vaccinated in Sub -Saharan Africa. This is compared to 63.4 % in Europe. The only sustainable 
solution is the ramping -up and diversification of manufacturi ng.  
5.243.   Addressing IP barriers is a crucial element in dealing with market concentration , which leads 
to inequitable distribution. We would insist that an outcome on the TRIPS Waiver must form part of 
the WTO response to the pandemic. A comprehensive outcome to the WTO response must include 
all key aspects, the most important to a sustainable response being aspects that will result in 
diversification of production . The TRIPS Waiver is therefore integral to a credible response.  
5.244.   The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:   
5.245.   Thank you Chair for your report. Now, for the much -anticipated Canadian intervention on 
5c), on behalf of the cosponsors of the draft General Council Declaration COVID -19 and Beyond 
Trade and Health, Canada wishes to thank Ambassador Walker for his report today. An increasing 
number of Members have provided support to this initiative with a very practical aim , which is the 
WTO can make trade part of the solution to what remains a global challenge. We welcome Costa 
Rica as a cosponsor and encourage others to join this effort.  
5.246.   We circulated a draft version of a draft Declaration in July and we have continually pointed 
to it in our contribution to the multilateral facilitator process for MC12. We welcome the ongoing 
positive engagement in the process with the view to finding the pathway towards MC12 and beyond. 
The co -sponsors urge the identification of complementarities so that our multilateral outcome on 
this critical issue can emerge for MC12. That multilateral outcome should include a number of 
concrete deliverables to respond to the current crisis and prepare for future ones. We see an MC12 
outcome comprising these key substantive elements: steps for better and more timely transparency 
of government trade -related actio ns, that Members exercise restrain when imposing and 
implementing export restrictions and that they review them and eliminate unnecessary ones, 
establishing best practices and lessons learned in customs and trade facilitation, including a call to 
accelerat e the implementation of the TFA, promotion of regulatory cooperation, steps for better 
monitoring of market developments to support quick identification of possible supply chain 
disruptions, improved cooperation between the WTO and other international orga nizations and the 
private sector to enhance resiliency and improve preparedness.  
5.247.   As outlined in the Draft Declaration, we also believe these elements may be complemented 
by additional aspects of trade policy including those related to intellectual propert y. In order to drive 
the process towards forward post MC12 this result needs to be coupled with a clear Work Programme 
for delivery by MC13. In addition to the key substantive elements to be agreed at MC12, Ministers 
should also provide guidance at MC12 on  such a Work Programme including its terms and objectives, 
scope and delivery timelines. We welcome continued engagement with the WTO Membership 
regarding how best to operationalize the Work Programme including ideas of cross cutting forum 
which could inte grate the work by individual committees as well as other ideas. The Work Programme 
should build on the MC12 outcome and provide more concrete deliverables at the latest by MC13 
without prejudice as to the form of such outcomes at this stage. Given the litt le time left before 
MC12 we invite the Facilitator to engage in text -based discussions as soon as possible.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 60 - 
 
  5.248.   The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement:   
5.249.   We thank you Chairman for your draft, I agree with the structure and we will work  together 
with others. On the systemic issues, as has been explained in detail already by the Ambassador of 
Norway and the Ambassador of Switzerland, we are also a supporter of that paper , so we would like 
to see that some elements of the proposal to be co nsidered as part of the Declaration. 
Notwithstanding a suggestion from the Ambassador  of the Russian Federation , we should not try to 
put too many thing s in there . The paper already contained language that we think is very balanced 
and we invite all non -supporters to take a look at the proposal.  
5.250.   The s econd issue I would like to see in there, which normally I do not highlight, is e -
commerce. This is a very important issue for us, and we have been participating in all sorts of 
negotiations and discussions re lating to e -commerce. We would like to see the extension of the 
moratorium being part of MC12 and we want to see a further addition of issues relating to e -
commerce on the JSI.  
5.251.   Third, about Ambassador Walker, we are very thankful and take note of his pres entation and 
what he has been consulting about , the non -legal aspects of the WTO issues that are relevant to the 
pandemic. We prefer to have the holistic approach on this matter, and I talked about this in the 
morning already on the TRIPS Waiver . We are also very interested  in it, but maybe with a narrow 
scope only related to vaccine s, but for the treatment of the pandemic in the WTO we prefer a holistic 
approach.  
5.252.   I want to highlight two issues that he has said, first, we welcome the active participation by 
the Secretariat in doing some more academic work and helping Members in providing details and 
information. I do not like to negotiate in ignorance, without any b asis or evidence and studies that 
support our negotiations and I think the Secretariat has to step up their contribution on these 
discussions. Second, on the issue of collaboration with international organizations, we also welcome 
that. Lastly, we will be happy to participate actively in future negotiations on this issue. Some other 
things that Thailand wants to highlight is about supply chain, trade facilitation and also, we just 
heard from the Ambassador of Canada, some elements that will be a good basis for our future 
discussions on this issue.  
5.253.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
5.254.   The European Union thanks the General Council Chair and Ambassador Walker for your 
reports and consultations. The European Union welcomes the launch of the process to reach an 
alignment among Members on the content of the Ministerial Declaration for MC12. That said, we 
have some concern s: even if the process is built 'bottom up ', negotiations will still be required once 
the text is on the ta ble. Circulating a text only at the end of October would actually be late. We need 
to go quickly – and the European Union would like to convey a sense of urgency.  
5.255.   On e-commerce , the European Union remains committed to ongoing discussions on the 
moratorium . We reiterate our support for extending the moratorium - at least until the next 
Ministerial Conference.  
5.256.   The European Union also thanks Ambassador Walker for his efforts as Facilitator on the WTO 
Response to the Pandemic. This response is one of the most  important point s for the forthcoming 
Ministerial Conference. We subscribe fully to the statement delivered by Canada on behalf of the 
cosponsors of the Trade and Health Initiative. There is now sufficient material on the table and we 
hope that the existin g submissions will help Ambassador Walker  in contributing to define what could 
be the WTO response at MC12 – as well as post -MC12 as we cannot exhaust the discussions within 
two months. Of course , an outcome on the T rade and H ealth strand of work will need  to be 
complemented by the I ntellectual Property  part of the discussions. The European Union is ready to 
work with you and the rest of the Membership to assist you to put us on the right track.  
5.257.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
5.258.   On Agenda  item 5.A, we thank the Chair for the outline, w hich we consider balanced, 
objective and factual.  The draft reflects the current situation while reaffirming the principles and 
commitments which will guide us post-MC12. While w e need to avoid the Christmas tree syndrome, WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 61 - 
 
  we should nevertheless highlight work and outcomes where consensus has been reached among the 
Members. We should avoid controversial issues that would prevent us from reaching an agreement 
on the Declaration. Be aring in mind that the last Ministerial Conference was four years ago, the 
world is watching us, and we need to show them our solidarity and ability to cooperate with each 
other.  
5.259.   On Agenda item 5.B, we will refer to it under Agenda item 6.  
5.260.   On Agenda item 5.C, Indonesia thanks Ambassador Walker for his report. Indonesia reminds 
all of us that the COVID -19 pandemic is far from over. We can only stop this deadly pandemic if we 
do it together and simultaneously in every corner of the world. Though we can cons ider current 
outcome proposals to address supply chain and distribution issues of vaccines, the response would 
be incomplete if it does not also address the issue of inequity and scaling up of vaccine production. 
Indonesia strongly urges including the temp orary TRIPS Waiver as an integral part of the WTO 
Response to the Pandemic, to ensure that this Organization contributes to the equal access of 
COVID -19 vaccines – a TRIPS Waiver that is targeted, time -bound and proportionate.    
5.261.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
5.262.   I will only comment in detail on the MC12 Outcome Document. Before I do, I would like to 
express the U nited Kingdom' s support for the statement by Canada on behalf of the T rade and Health 
Initiative  co-sponsors.  
5.263.   Turning to the MC12 outcome document, I want to thank you for your efforts on moving 
forward these discussions and thank you for the draft language you have proposed and 
accompanying three questions that my colleagues in capita l are currently considering. For now, I 
would just like to record three points. We think the outcome document needs to recognise the twin 
crises the world is facing right now , both the pandemic, and the climate crisis. This latter will be top 
of all our mi nds in late November coming hot on the heels of COP26 in Glasgow. As well as recording 
outcomes agreed at the Conference, we should use the document to set a strong platform for our 
work post -MC12, not least on the critical question of WTO Reform. We shoul d also seek to give 
guidance on the way forward on other issues important to our societies and businesses in the third 
decade of this 21st century , including environment and climate change, gender, and services 
amongst others. While we should find consensu s wherever we can, we should not be too afraid of 
constructive disagreements. If it helps us get an agreed document overall, we may need to accept 
recording the different views of Members across certain issues. We look forward to continuing to 
engage in th is process.  
5.264.   The representative of Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
5.265.   An MC12 outcome in the area of trade and health is of particular importance because it will 
not only provide multilateral guidelines and best practices in response to th e current and future 
pandemic, but it would be the very evidence of the WTO 's relevance that can make an impact in the 
real world. In this regard, I am convinced that the Trade and Health Initiative and comprehensive 
trade -related actions and principles ca n certainly form a good basis for the MC12 outcome. After all, 
the WTO is an organization that governs international trade and promotes open market. In line with 
this, we should focus on keeping essential medical goods to flow unimpeded and global supply c hains 
to be protected. With that, my delegation will continue to work with WTO Members for the meaningful 
outcome in this area and support the facilitator 's process to integrate all the relevant proposals. We 
look forward to the Facilitator 's document prepared for the MC12 outcome.   
5.266.   As regards item 5 .B, it is positive that despite different views, Members have a common 
understanding that the growth of e -commerce helped facilitate faster and more affordable trade, 
and provided increased opportun ities for businesses, including MSMEs and women entrepreneurs, 
especially during the pandemic.  In this respect, my delegation recognizes the value of the Work 
Programme, and stands ready to discuss ways to move forward under your leadership.   
5.267.   The represent ative of Australia  provided the following statement:  
5.268.   Australia is working for an MC12 outcomes package that covers new multilateral and 
plurilateral trade rules, a credible response to COVID 19, and a way forward on WTO reform.  On WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 62 - 
 
  fisheries subsidies, we a re closer than we have ever been to finalising these negotiations – but there 
are some important compromises still to be made.  
5.269.   On Trade and Health, we thank Ambassadors Walker, Spencer and Tan for their considerable 
efforts in consulting Members on possibl e MC12 outcomes. We also support the statement made by 
Canada on behalf of the Trade and Health Initiative co -sponsors. That initiative forms a credible and 
realistic basis for a multilateral outcome at MC12 . While we recognise the need for pragmatism, it is 
also important that we achieve an outcome on trade and health that is ambitious enough to meet 
stakeholders ' expectations for what the WTO should be able to deliver in response to a crisis of this 
magnitude. At a minimum, this will require us to reaffir m the value of openness in the international 
trading system, and the importance of ensuring any emergency trade measures, including export 
restrictions, are targeted, temporary, transparent and consistent with WTO rules.  
5.270.   There appears to be broad support f or work on trade facilitation, regulatory coherence and 
cooperation between Members. Outcomes on transparency and monitoring, and increasing the 
WTO's engagement with other international organisations, also appear to be doable.  We also 
encourage all Member s to engage in ongoing discussions on the intellectual property issues with a 
spirit of compromise and flexibility, with the goal of achieving an outcome on those issues by MC12.  
5.271.   Our priority remains to secure a meaningful outcome on agriculture at MC12 th at lays the 
groundwork for subsequent negotiations that have the prospect of leading to meaningful reform, 
particularly on domestic support, Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes (PSH) and 
transparency. Australia would also like to see a plurilate ral outcome on the services domestic 
regulation joint statement initiative (JSI) by MC12 and substantial progress on the e -commerce and 
investment facilitation JSIs.  An MC12 package should also incorporate outcomes that promote 
sustainable and inclusive tr ade – encouraging environmentally sustainable policies that support 
global trade; promoting MSME participation in trade; and ensuring women have better opportunities 
to benefit from trade. It should also include a plan for progressing WTO reform beyond MC1 2. In 
particular Australia would like to see a commitment to a reform pathway to reinvigorate the WTO 
dispute settlement system and to enhance transparency.  
5.272.   The representative of Colombia  delivered the following statement:  
5.273.   Under this Agenda item, we wanted to touch on two points, the first regarding our preference 
for the outcome document of the Ministerial Conference and the second concerning the 
Organization's efforts to deal with the pandemic.  On the first point, we would like to state that, for 
Colombia, it is important for the outcome document of the Ministerial Conference to contain a 
reference to the Dispute Settlement Body, and in particular to the Appellate Body impasse and the 
growing number of disputes in limbo. We understand the difficultie s in this regard, but I am sure 
that we can find common ground. Above all, we do not consider it appropriate to stop mentioning 
this issue, as we would be contributing to its "normalization". In this vein, we fully support the 
statement by the Friends of t he System read out by Switzerland yesterday.  
5.274.   On the second point, related to the Organization's pandemic response, we would like to state 
that, from our perspective, the global trade in vaccines, specifically among countries, has so far 
failed to find an a ppropriate solution.  Since our "appeal" at the General Council meeting of 1  March 
this year on behalf of six Latin American vaccine -importing countries, we have insisted that, besides 
global vaccine production, the functioning of global trade in vaccines s hould be predictable and 
reliable. What we have seen, however, is that vaccines and their components, which are perhaps 
the most precious commodities at the present juncture, do not circulate freely or predictably.  
5.275.   We have talked a lot about the problem o f vaccine production, and this is very important. 
But we cannot overlook the fact that, once produced, vaccines are not being properly marketed 
under the most basic free market conditions. Several Members have imposed multiple restrictions 
on exports and a re making little effort to be transparent about these restrictions.  Proof of this lies 
in the fact that the vast majority of vaccines have remained in the countries where they are 
produced. To some, this seems intuitive, even justified, but in reality it i s the frustration of the 
promises of free trade. This Organization and the agreements underpinning it are based on the 
fundamental understanding that it is not necessary to produce all goods, since some countries can 
be more effective in producing and mark eting them, leading to a win -win situation. The distortions 
we are witnessing with regard to vaccines undermine this premise.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 63 - 
 
  5.276.   Consequently, we are faced not only with a global public health crisis but also with concerns 
over the functioning of the multila teral trading system and a questioning of its principles. Colombia 
considers that, in addition to talking about the production of vaccines and components, trade 
facilitation, and cooperation with other bodies, among other highly pertinent issues, we cannot  avoid 
a frank discussion on perhaps the most natural issue for this Organization, which is the distortion 
and erosion of the system of imports and exports for vaccines.  
5.277.   With our Latin American partners, we have made specific proposals and have drawn atte ntion 
to the problem of the truncated trade in vaccines. However, the current discussions aimed at 
achieving a concrete outcome at the Ministerial Conference give little consideration to these elements 
and do not heed the voices of those of us who have sha red specific concerns and suggestions. Global 
crises such as the COVID -19 pandemic require us to leave aside mercantilist interests and encourage 
collective action.  
5.278.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
5.279.   On Agenda item 5 .A, we remain fully engaged in the process which you are leading .  
5.280.   On Agenda item 5 .B, we will be making our statement under Agenda Item 6 .  
5.281.   On Agenda item 5.C, my delegation would like to thank the Facilitator for WTO response to 
pandemic for his report. We woul d also like to thank both the Facilitator and the General Council 
Chair for their consultations on this issue. India has been regularly participating in these discussions. 
We have also submitted a list of elements, stating that we like these to be discusse d as part of this 
process.  For the benefit of Members, let me present those elements:  
5.282.    The Secretariat to prepare a catalogue of flexibilities under the WTO Agreements, and 
Members to consider how to use these flexibilities and how to improve access to the m to best enable 
a response to current and future pandemics as well as natural disasters, including through 
consideration of possible escape clauses or a 'peace clause' to avoid disputes. We also need to 
identify WTO Agreements, which do not contain such f lexibilities or escape clauses and examine 
possibility of providing flexibilities/escape clauses in such Agreements, to best enable a response to 
future pandemics as well as natural disasters.  
5.283.   Most of the International Organizations, like the International  Monitory Fund, have 
introduced flexibilities or deviated from their stated stance to enable countries tackle the pandemic.  
Can the WTO also catalogue rules, which can be relaxed/loosened to enable Members tackle adverse 
impact of pandemics and natural disasters?  
5.284.   The WTO response should not only try to address the existing trade barriers, but also address 
new and emerging ones, like vaccine differentiations or COVID passports affecting personnel 
movements in turn resulting in trade barriers for export of services. WTO response, in addition to 
focusing on facilitating the free flow of goods, should also provide for the free flow of ser vices and 
supplies, like health services, international telemedicine services needed for handling the pandemic 
or natural disasters.  
5.285.   While considering issues relating to export restriction s as part of the WTO response, 
Members shall also keep in mind that  export restrictions are symptoms of acute supply side 
constraints, and till we address such constraints, exports restrictions will continue to surface one 
way or the other.  We must acknowledge that meeting domestic demand of critical products is a 
priorit y over trading those products.  
5.286.   While providing for regulatory coherence to avoid duplications and save time, due care 
should be taken to ensure that all concerned regulatory authorities have access to the regulatory 
dossiers from the regulatory authority p roviding initial approval.  
5.287.   Temporary measures such as trade facilitation measures and tariff liberalization, which in 
any case Members can put in place on their own to handle pandemics and natural disasters, need 
not be made permanent , as making them perm anent would unnecessarily circumscribe Members ' 
policy space during normal times. The d ecision to take any measure permanent or not should be left 
to the concerned Members, as per the rights and obligations under the WTO.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 64 - 
 
  5.288.   As part of its response to pandemi cs and natural disaster s, the WTO, along with other 
International Organizations , need to work on putting in place a pandemic response system, wherein 
we create a pool of resources in terms of essential goods and services to tackle such pandemic or 
natural disasters. In the context of current pandemic, such goods could be oximeter s, oxygen 
concentrators , test kits , and some essential medicines ; while such services could be healthcare 
services, telemedicine , etc. Operationalizing this mechanism in case of ess ential goods would include 
mapping manufacturing capacities and demands and matchmaking to cater to such demands. In the 
case of services, it would involve pooling resources in terms of healthcare and other professionals 
drawn from various Members with mut ual recognition or with relaxed recognition norms , temporarily 
facilitating the movement of such professionals, including through temporary measures involving 
special visas/permits, to match the availability of such resources with demand and provide for sh ort 
duration supply of their services, say for a period of four to eight weeks, both physically or remotely , 
to address the acute shortages.  
5.289.   Food Security issues, including Public Stock Holding for food security purposes. While 
addressing food security con cerns is a legitimate ask, the same goes beyond the ambit of the 
package for the pandemic. Food security is a well -recognized concern faced by the world, especially 
in the developing countries and LDCs. A permanent solution to the issue of PSH for food sec urity 
would go a long way in serving the countries beyond pandemic times.  
5.290.   And most importantly, addressing intellectual property challenges in augmenting 
manufacturing capacities and ensuring unimpeded, timely and secure access to quality, safe, 
efficaciou s and affordable health products and technologies for all, for a rapid and effective response 
to pandemics, including Waiver form specific provisions of TRIPS Agreement, wherein the TRIPS 
Waiver component has to be finalized before MC12.  Any WTO response t o pandemics without TRIPS 
Waiver element will not be credible.  
5.291.   For the WTO response package to be effective, it shall also contain an inbuilt monitoring 
mechanism to assess its effectiveness of measures put in place , whether they are providing desired 
results, and if not, what further steps need to be taken . 
5.292.   We are willing to engage constructively in any process to formulate an effective WTO 
response to pandemic s and natural disasters, including engaging in any text -based process, provided 
such discussions  follow a balanced approach and address issues of concern to all Members. In 
conclusion, we need to be mindful that lives and livelihoods are being lost and economies world over 
are suffering while we continue to debate, for more than a year by now , on iss ues relating to the 
WTO's response to the pandemic, including the TRIPS Waiver proposal. The credibility of this 
institution hinges in quickly formulating such a response, of which the TRIPS Waiver has to be an 
essential part of.  
5.293.    The representative of Kazakhstan  delivered the following statement:  
5.294.   I just would like to mention that my country became a Member of the WTO, as Honourable 
Minister from Liberia has mentioned, also very recently, six years ago, in 2015 we finalised our 
accession negotiations. Since then, I thought that as soon as I become a n Ambassador here I would 
be negotiating, but so far I am only listening to statements, at TNC meetings, at General Council 
meetings, we always appeal to General Council Chair or TNC Chair and speak to the Chair but not 
to each other. I think it is high ti me to start talking to each other having outreach and discussing 
the sensitive issues . We should go beyond our national interest s, which are very well known . Having 
a package of each country's position on each issue, I believe is not going to lay the groun d for the 
outcome at MC12 . In order to reach an outcome at MC12 , we need to negotiate. I just would like to 
call my colleagues here that it is high time, and the days are subsiding as well as the level of our 
ambition is lowering down . Now we are speaking about political declarations, even we are not 
confident that these political declarations for the Ministerial Declaration as well as the WTO's 
response to COVID , will come out . Even for political declarations we need to negotiate. I would like 
to encourage , to call on you , that we need to start discussing with each other not only reading and 
stating again and again our national interest , which is very well known to each of the sides. We need 
to work and to be very serious with the results of MC12 if we real ly want to get an outcome at MC12, 
if we don 't, we can continue reading our national statements. I thank the General Council Chair and 
Ambassador Walker for your hard work, and we stand ready to help you and to enrich the documents, 
the skeletons of which you have presented to us.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 65 - 
 
  5.295.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  provide d the following statement:  
5.296.   Under item 5.B, t he moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions has 
underpinned a stable, predictable and conducive environment for internation al e-commerce for more 
than two decades. Hong Kong, China all along supports making this moratorium permanent, but if 
we cannot forge a consensus on this in time by MC12, we believe the moratorium should be extended 
further until at least the following Min isterial Conference. This decision will be crucial to avoiding 
unnecessary disruptions to the global e -commerce environment during this critical time under the 
pandemic, it will also contribute to a speedy post -pandemic global economic recovery.  
5.297.   The repre sentative of Japan  provided the following statement:  
5.298.   On item 5.C, a t MC12, we should aim  to agree on a Ministerial Declaration on health that 
include s important factors such as trade facilitation, export restrictions, and production expansion 
of COVID -19 vaccines and therapeutics. In particular, Japan would like to include elements of the 
draft General Council Declaration on Trade and Health ( document WT/GC/W/823/Rev.1) in the 
Ministerial Declaration , from the perspective of ensuring the content is meaningful.  
5.299.   The representative of Morocco  provided the following statement:  
5.300.   Regarding item 5.C, I would first like to reiterate my country's unflagging suppo rt to the 
Director General for her tireless efforts and her commitment to reinforcing global manufacturing and 
equitable distribution of tools to tackle COVID 19, including vaccines.  My country also supports the 
work done by the WTO to ensure viable supply  chains worldwide and to bar any kind of protectionism 
or nationalism.  Furthermore, allow me to join the previous speakers in thanking Ambassador Walker 
for his commitment and excellent report.  
5.301.   With the Twelfth Ministerial Conference (MC12) just a few week s away, the WTO must seize 
this opportunity to demonstrate its relevance, in general of course, but even more so in addressing 
global crises, through clear and active participation in the international effort to tackle the COVID -
19 pandemic.  To this end, M embers must take a deliberate political stance while keeping in mind 
the specific needs of developing countries and least developed countries (LDC) in the context of a 
pandemic, the full magnitude of which is still unknown.  
5.302.   Since we did not take the floor under A genda item 4, and as a Member of the African Group, 
one of the co -sponsors of the Proposal for a waiver from certain provisions of the Trade Related 
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights Agreement for the prevention, containment and treatment of 
COVID -19, we consider that a plausible outcome in the response to the pandemic must include this 
proposal.  
5.303.   While we concentrate our efforts on attaining constructive outcomes at MC12, we must also 
bear in mind the medium and long term. To do so, the heart of our concerns should not only be 
reviving the global economy in a structured manner, but also closing the gaps that became apparent 
post pandemic, by focusing on appropriate and sufficient access to financing, targeted capacity 
building, effective technology transfer and better management of debt issues. This is the path to 
inclusive growth and sustainable development.  
5.304.   The General  Council took note of Chair's  reports, the report of the Facilitator on the WTO 
Response to the Pandemic and of the statements made . 
6  WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE AND MORATORIUM ON IMPOSING 
CUSTOMS DUTIES ON ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSIONS – REQUEST FROM INDIA AND SOUTH 
AFRICA  
6.1.  The Chair  recalled  that India and South Africa had requested that the item concerning the Wor k 
Programme on Electronic Commerce and Moratorium on Imposing Customs Duties on Electronic 
Transmissions be included in the agenda of today's meeting. The item had also been included in the 
agenda of the March , May and July meeting s, as well as previously in October and December 2020.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 66 - 
 
  6.2.  The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement :  
6.3.  Under items 5.B and 6, w e associate ourselves with the statement by the Africa Group and the 
ACP Group . We thank you Chair for your report and efforts on this important topic as captured in 
Agenda item 5.B. The South African and Indian delegations have consistently called for structured 
discussions in the General Council to be reinvigorated. This is all the more important in the context 
of the pandemic which has exposed the enormous digital divide.  
6.4.  The growth of e -commerce during the COVID -19 pandemic has yielded benefits for some 
Members but these have been spread unevenly among and within countries. The di gital economy is 
characterized by high levels of concentration that constrain the accrual of benefits to MSMEs. The 
Work Programme is designed to adopt a comprehensive and holistic approach to e -commerce to 
facilitate equitable benefits for all. The reinvi goration of the Work Programme is, therefore , critical 
given our interest an inclusive digital economy that promotes digital industrialization and the need 
to address the digital divide.  
6.5.  With technological developments, there has been a rapid increase in o nline trade of digitised 
and digitizable goods. Many goods are leaving their physical carriers and are crossing borders 
electronically. In our submission, document WT/GC/W/798, we stressed that re -consideration of the 
moratorium is critical for developing countries to preserve policy space to regulate imports, generate 
revenue through a simple and direct instrument such as customs duties and achieve digital 
industrialization.   
6.6.  An expanded definition of E lectronic Transmission  (ET) that includes services is of concern to 
us. Research by UNCTAD (June 2020 -Research Paper 47) estimates that total imports of services 
via Mode 1 amounted to USD 705 billion in 2017 while total imports of digitizable products were 
around USD 80 billion in 2017.  The UNCTAD Paper also  estimates potential losses from the 
moratorium as amounting up to USD 10 billion per annum for developing countries and only 
USD 289 million in losses for advanced economies. These forgone revenues to developing countries 
will be compounded by rapidly inc reasing advances in technologies such as additive manufacturing.  
6.7.  Issues identified by Members under the Work Programme such as classification, definition and 
scope must be clarified under a multilateral process to enable a common understanding on e -
commer ce must be addressed.  We believe that structured discussions on the scope and definition of 
ET are required in order for us to understand the real impact of the moratorium on customs duties 
given the different views of Members. Broadening the scope for goo ds and the inclusion of services 
covered under GATS Mode  1, without fully understanding the implications , poses risks to Member 
and drastically encroaches on the policy space and flexibility of developing countries to regulate 
importation of services. The absence of a shared and common understanding on the scope and 
definition of ET will make a decision on the extension of the moratorium at MC12 difficult. We must 
reinvigorate the Work Programme so as to remedy the unsustainable inequities and broaden the 
benefits from growing e -commerce.  
6.8.  It is sometimes argued that exporters from developing countries need to import digitizable 
products in order to improve their production and exports of many products and services. Removal 
of the moratorium in no way means that Members will necessarily impose customs duties across the 
board. The key is policy space and to use such policy space appropriately for domestic digital 
industrialization and generation of local jobs in the era of Industry 4.0. In addition, internal t axes 
are not a substitute for tariffs which serve a different purpose which is importantly a policy tool for 
industrial development.  
6.9.  Developmental aspects of electronic commerce; scope, definition and impact of the moratorium 
on customs duties on electroni c transmissions; and examination of the challenges experienced by 
developing countries and LDCs (least developed countries) in relation to electronic commerce , and 
explore ways of enhancing the participation of developing countries in electronic commerce , remains 
key. 
6.10.   These are among a range of issues that India and South Africa have unpacked in a series of 
paper s that will soon be shared with the broader Membership. It is hoped that these papers will spur 
discussion on developmental aspects of the WTO mand ated work.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 67 - 
 
  6.11.    The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
6.12.   In our intervention yesterday under item 5 .B we highlighted our perception, understanding 
and our position on e -commerce and, of course, we pointed our support for more structured and 
targeted discussions on horizontal and vertical issues regarding the trade -related aspects of e -
commerce under the W ork Programme , with the view to setting an inclusive and development -
oriented agenda for consideration by Ministers at MC12. Regarding the moratorium on electronic 
transmissions, Nigeria is mindful of the negative effects of an unpredictable global e -comme rce 
environment for businesses and consumers that is likely to occur from the non -renewal of the 
moratorium at the MC12. This would be devastating given that the world is still struggling to recover 
from COVID -19 and the climate regarding economic difficul ties. In view of this, we have consistently 
said that Nigeria is in support of the temporary extension of the moratorium at MC12.  
6.13.   The representative of Sri Lanka  delivered the following statement:  
6.14.   On Agenda item 5.B and Agenda item 6, my delegation wishes to reiterate its statements 
made and positions elaborated in the previous General Council meetings as well as at General Council 
Chair's consultations, which took place under different configurations. We stress that re -
consideration of the moratorium is cr itical for developing countries to preserve policy space to 
regulate imports, generate revenue through a simple and direct instrument such as customs duties 
and achieve digital industrialization.   
6.15.   Based on the identification of a small number of digitizabl e goods in five areas, UNCTAD has 
estimated a loss in tariff revenue of more than $10 billion per annum globally because of the 
moratorium, 95 per cent of which is borne by developing countries, including Sri Lanka. It is also to 
be borne in mind that this  calculation does not include custom surcharges (CESS), Other Duties & 
Charges, and Internal Taxes. When we consider that Customs duties on electronic transmissions 
cover, not only digitised and digitizable goods, but also digitally transmitted services, t he negative 
impact of continuing with the moratorium on developing countries would be even greater. According 
to the World Bank collection of development indicators, compiled from officially recognized sources, 
revenue generated from Customs and other impo rt duties in Sri Lanka is reported at 19.08% of 
overall tax revenue in 2019, which indicates its bias towards more outward trade. Sri Lanka is a net 
importer of Electronic Transmission products and as revealed in the UNCTAD study, the 
corresponding Sri Lan ka's per annum tariff revenue loss of the moratorium on imposition of customs 
duties on Electronic Transmission items is USD 10 Million, this comes to around 2% of Sri Lanka's 
total revenue from customs duties alone in 2019.  
6.16.   The proponents state that ther e will be significant gains and benefits for developing countries 
through the continuation of the moratorium, but they continue to fail to address concerns of the 
developing countries with respect to the importance of preserving their policy space. Customs  duties 
are used by countries to support nascent domestic industries, regulate an unwanted surge in imports 
and facilitate industrialization. Countries like Sri Lanka need policy and fiscal space in the digital 
economy so that they can develop their digita l competencies in their own space and provide a level 
playing field to their infant digital sectors. The development experience of nearly all countries across 
the world makes it evident that tariffs are amongst the most effective policy tools for achieving  these 
objectives. Customs duties have been resorted to by developed countries to provide protection to 
their industry and to enable them to become internationally competitive. It is only fair that the 
developing world be given a similar opportunity. Thus,  retaining the policy space to impose customs 
duties becomes an important objective in itself.  
6.17.   The absence of a shared and common understanding on the scope and definition of electronic 
transmissions will make a decision on the extension of the moratorium a challenge at MC12. It is 
therefore extremely important to have structured and focused discussions under the Work 
Programme on E -commerce, so as to remedy the unsustainable inequities and broaden the benefits 
from growing e -commerce. Sri Lanka has high ex pectations for MC12 in this regard. It is important 
that WTO Members share their know -how to bridge the digital divide and facilitate digital technology 
transfers.  
6.18.   Sri Lanka stands ready to engage meaningfully and constructively towards the collaborative 
formulation of the mutually agreeable recommendation on the moratorium for the consideration of WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 68 - 
 
  Ministers in MC12, and needs assurances from Members, particularly the ones who are ready to 
address the concerns of developing countries.  
6.19.   The representative  of Nepal  delivered  the following statement:  
6.20.   My delegation thanks India and South Africa for bringing the agenda item at this meeting.  In 
the wake of the pandemic, we cannot survive without going digital. However, due to huge digital 
divide among and within the Members, the LDCs and LLDCs have not been able to participate in 
global trading system through e -commerce. Insufficient ICT infrastructure, and weak institutional 
and human capacity are their main obstacles. Needful intervention has become urgent throu gh the 
E-commerce Work Programme to enable LDCs and LLDCs not to benefit from but just to survive in 
the global trade. Widespread access to telecommunications at low prices and with latest technology; 
strengthening  human, institutional and technical infrastructure; capacity -building in information 
technology; and promoting technology transfer and foreign direct investment would be some 
important initiatives to overcome their capacity constraints in e -commerce.  
6.21.   Regarding the issue of the moratorium, clarity on the scope of the mora torium is absolutely 
necessary. Finally, implications of a continued moratorium should be assessed before taking any 
decision on it.  
6.22.   The representative of Vanuatu, on behalf of the Pacific Group , delivered the following 
statement:   
6.23.   We would like to thank India and South Africa for the proposal on electronic transmissions. 
E-commerce has grown significantly in recent years and particularly more in response to the 
COVID -19 pandemic , as businesses adapt to lockdowns around the world. Th e Pacific sees e -
commerce as both providing potential opportunities to harness our trade and build resilience to 
external shocks. However, many developing countries, including our Group, were not able to take 
advantage of these online opportunities due to various challenges, particularly for small and micro 
enterprises, this includes weak infrastructure, limited skills, low level of access to internet and high 
connectivity costs. We, therefore, consider the Work Programme on E -commerce as an important 
platform to help us address the digital divide faced by small vulnerable economies like us. In this 
connection, the Pacific Group supports the reinvigoration of the Work Programme on E -commerce 
as agreed by the General Council in December 2019, which also calle d on structured discussions 
under the Work Programme and the moratorium, including its revenue impact. We, therefore, 
support a call for you, as Chair, to facilitate structured discussions on the reinvigoration of this Work 
Programme and we support the ext ension of the Work Programme at MC12.  
6.24.   The representative of Mauritius, on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
6.25.   We thank India and South Africa for introducing these two issues on the Work Programme on 
E-commerce and also the mora torium on imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions. The 
African Group supports the call by India and South Africa for a more targeted discussion on the Work 
Programme for E -commerce and we emphasize the need for reinvigorating the process, this 
Programme, and for bringing greater clarity and timelines in the process of reinvigorating the 
framework. We appreciate, Chair, that the digital divide in Africa goes beyond the walls of this 
institution and we believe nonetheless that the WTO would have a n important role to play in helping 
bridge the digital divide which today separates Africa from the rest of the world, and which has been 
further exacerbated during the pandemic. On the issue of the Moratorium, at this point I would like 
to add that many c ountries in Africa are still waiting the results of studies being conducted on the 
effects of the moratorium on them so we may come back on this one later.  
6.26.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered  the following statement:  
6.27.   Switzerland has noted with interest the instructive discussions that have taken place since 
the last renewal of the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions.  The health crisis 
has been an eye opener, revealing the usefulness of digital trade and its considerable econ omic 
potential for all Members.  With regard to the digitalisation of economies, Switzerland is aware of the 
existence of various digital loopholes and the difficulties faced by a great number of developing 
Members, in particular least developed countries.  While these difficulties call for appropriate WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 69 - 
 
  responses, we are firmly convinced that the deterioration of the framework conditions for digital 
trade is not one of them.  Switzerland therefore strongly supports the moratorium on electronic 
transmissions. Ho wever, we are aware of the reluctance of some Members to make the moratorium 
permanent. We will therefore work to find a compromise solution in order to arrive at a decision at 
the Twelfth Ministerial Conference.  
6.28.   In addition, various aspects of digital tra de and the moratorium are addressed in the 
"structured discussions" agreed in December 2019. In this regard, we would like to thank you for 
organising an open-ended  meeting on 5 July, which allowed for interesting discussions.  Switzerland 
is of course read y to continue the revitalisation of the Work Programme, and to continue exchanging 
views within the framework of the structured discussions and the specialized bodies.  
6.29.   The representative of Ukraine  delivered the following statement:  
6.30.   Ukraine would like to r eiterate its position on this issue.  Ukraine remains a strong supporter 
of the M oratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions since it believes it encourages the 
engagement of business, especially MSMEs, in cross -border e -commerce and has already  contributed 
significantly to its global growth. Ukraine supported the extension of the Moratorium until MC12 and 
confirms its readiness to continue the work on this issue with interested Members under the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce.  
6.31.   The represe ntative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
6.32.   The United Kingdom is a strong supporter of the Moratorium on imposing customs duties on 
electronic transmissions and supports the position that it should be made permanent. The increasing 
uncertainty on the moratorium being extended at MC12 has resulted in an uptick of concerns from 
stakeholders. We therefore call on Members to productively engage in discussions on extending the 
Moratorium at MC12.  
6.33.   The representative of Jamaica, on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following statement:  
6.34.   The ACP Group wishes to thank India and South Africa for placing this item on the agenda of 
this meeting, we also wish to thank both Ambassadors for their statements. As indicated in previous 
General Council statements, the 1998 E -commerce Work Programme is a critical aspect of the WTO's 
regular work. We reiterate that the WTO must deepen engagement in understanding the question 
of the customs duties moratorium as we continue to believe that these discussions must go beyond 
the moratorium to include other pertinent issues such as the extent of coverage of digital or internal 
taxes.  
6.35.   We also recall our concern that in the MC12 we will again face the expiry of the moratorium 
should we fail to make suf ficient progress in our discussions on the scope, definition and impact of 
the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions. Significant strives have been made 
in advancing ICT infrastructure and services and we have seen the benefits in many r espects during 
the still evolving COVID -19 crisis. It is, however, important that we emphasize that the significant 
digital divide that continuous to exist within and among countries must be addressed with utmost 
urgency. This brings us back to the need fo r the structured discussions on the E -commerce Work 
Programme and its renewal at MC12. Some of the other areas of interest of countries include the 
cost to developing and LDC consumers and businesses, discrepancies between traditional goods or 
products and  their electronic equivalents and the application of internal taxes on electronic 
transmission. A number of issues were raised on the Work Programme on the negotiation in the JSI 
process . It is important that the Work Programme is prioritized as it encompa sses an agreed 
workstream , which result ed in balanced outcomes in the context of e -commerce. A pragmatic 
discussion is needed  within the context of the 1998 Work Programme on the issues of source code, 
localisation and the impact on data flows as well as c onsumer protection. The General Council in 
various formats can play a pivotal role in those discussions. Our Group will continue to play its part 
in ensuring that the Work Programme continues to remain relevant and addresses issues of socio -
economic intere st to Members of the Group. We will continue to support your leadership on these 
issues, Chair, as we seek to find a landing zone for MC12.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 70 - 
 
  6.36.   The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement:  
6.37.   I want to thank the DG for briefing us about the O ECD meetings as well as other Ambassadors 
who have contributed. Thailand hopes that we will be able to find a landing zone in several key 
issues . We also take note of the strong statement by Kazakhstan's Ambassador last night, we should 
start talking to ea ch other more. My delegation is prepar ed to be flexible on many key issues, but 
we also would like to see other key Members of both sides of the extremes of any issue showing 
their willingness to move as well. Many Members here, if I may speak frankly too,  are in the 
midstream, we can be flexible on many issues, but no one wants to show the ir cards first, if we do 
not see the two extremes moving. We hope that consultations will take place either led by you, 
Chairman, by the D irector -General , or whoever is a ssigned, and that we will be able to find some 
clear common ground or landing zones for several key issues that are coming very quickly. We only 
have a few weeks left, and I share the same sense of urgency as the Australian Ambassador and 
Kazakhstan's Amba ssador delivered yesterday. If we want to bring the Ministers here, we have to 
have something significant for them to show the world that the WTO is actually important and 
relevant.  
6.38.   On e-commerce, I just have two short points, because we already said that  we support the 
extension of the moratorium yesterday. I thank the Ambassador from South Africa for her statement, 
I take note of the concerns that many developing countries have shared. In Thailand,  because of 
COVID -19, we have seen the importance of grow ing e-commerce . Our view is that we do not need 
too many rules for e -commerce, especially for the entrepreneurs and businesses to grow. We may 
need some rules to take care of the consumers or the people. With the fast -expanding electronic 
commerce and trad e in the digital economy, maybe some consumer groups and people are 
vulnerable or being taken advantage of. In our view , for the traffic of e -commerce trade , we do not 
want to see any unnecessary limitation, but we see the need for consumer protection, for  
cyberattack, for consumer fraud. We take note of the concern of the digital divide, which for me 
actually is not digital divide anymore . Every  country has telecommunication network, telephone, 
mobile phone, they can make use of e -commerce, but I understand that not every country can 
benefit from e -commerce because it requires different kind of training and capacity building . But it 
is not only t he matter of digital divide anymore. I truly believe that digital divide in terms of 
technology availability or networking has reduced quite a lot even in Africa. I take note that there 
are important implications on services commitments with the growth of e-commerce , especially in 
Modes 1 and 2, and it also has relations with Mode 3 , on commercial presence. On the implication 
on commitments, in Thailand we are looking at it from a legal perspective, especially on electronic 
payments and data localisation . There are various ongoing topics which are relevant to the growth 
of e-commerce. We should not try to regulate or restrict access to e -commerce too much, but we 
have to take note and take care of concerns under consumer protection.  
6.39.   My second point is that I heard many Members mentioning about the loss of revenue from 
customs . I would say that if you allow your business to grow, your revenue will be easily offset by 
revenue in VAT, the consumption tax will grow in tandem with the growth of e -commerce operato rs 
and businesses who can sell or buy in the country. I understand that many countries still depend on 
revenue from customs, but we have seen that with many FTAs a lot of things have changed. The 
focus of revenue of government should shift from customs to VAT and even corporate tax and other 
taxes, so for me this argument may become less important in the future. That is what I have to 
share at this moment.  
6.40.   The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
6.41.   I want to thank you Chair and the Sec retariat for all of your efforts to further advance this 
important issue. Ensuring predictability and stability, as noted by Nigeria, and certainty , has never 
been so key to the multilateral trading system. Therefore, given the current context , we hope all  
Members will demonstrate pragmatism and agree to the extension of the existing e -commerce 
moratorium and the Work Programme at MC12. It is clear that these two elements are closely linked, 
and we do not see a path forward where only the Work Programme get s extended. We certainly took 
note of the general concerns raised by a number of delegates and we have been engaging actively 
through the dedicated, structured and the G eneral -Council  discussions including through 
cosponsoring papers. We believe that struc tured discussions are the best avenue to engage in 
discussions on the e -commerce moratorium including on its concrete positive benefits. Canada 
remains committed and constructively engaged on these issues, therefore Canada is ready to focus WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 71 - 
 
  only on the ext ension of the existing e -commerce moratorium and its Work Programme at MC12 
even though our long -standing goal remains a permanent prohibition.   
6.42.   The representative of Colombia  provided the following statement : 
6.43.   We would like to reiterate and place on record  once again our support for the renewal of the 
e-commerce moratorium. This position stems from a careful analysis of the implications of the 
decision. Colombia is a developing country that faces major challenges in matters of taxation. 
However, in recent d ecades, it has invested in boosting the digital economy and creative industries 
that, according to the government's analysis, will create greater wealth and tax revenues in the 
medium term, with the additional advantage of promoting economic growth through the 
strengthening of micro -, small and medium -sized enterprises.  
6.44.   The representative of Tunisia  provided the following statement:  
6.45.   In the coming years, we will certainly remember 2020 as the reference year for e -commerce. 
Never before had an economic  sector experienced such strong, sudden growth. The share of e -
commerce in world trade rose by nearly 5 points in a single year.  Firms and consumers who 
successfully 'went digital ' have helped mitigate the economic slowdown caused by the pandemic.  
Unfortun ately, most developing countries and LDCs have been unable to take advantage of the 
opportunities provided by e -commerce due to persistent obstacles, infrastructure, the high cost of 
connectivity, over reliance on fiat money, as well as limited digital ski lls in their countries.  The divide 
tends to widen and delays will accumulate , because the countries that best capitalize on the potential 
of e-commerce today will also likely be in the best position to reach global markets throughout the 
digitalisation of the economy.   
6.46.   In this respect, Tunisia remains of the view that the WTO Members could help mitigate this 
divide by agreeing on a concrete and ambitious action plan that would relaunch the 1998 Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce, while respecting all the  Ministerial decisions that have yet to 
be fulfilled.  Regarding the moratorium, we stress the importance of delineating the scope of the 
concept of 'electronic transmission ', the products and activities concerned, both at present and in 
the future, prior t o taking any decision on the moratorium. Members must have the necessary 
elements to assess the impact on their local industries and their financial resources.  The evolution 
of the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce would help to shed light on certain c oncepts, and 
to better develop a shared view among Members on the usefulness of the moratorium.  
6.47.   The representative of Japan  provided the following statement:  
6.48.   Japan believes that the moratorium has provided certainty and predictability in digital trade 
for both consumers and businesses, including MSMEs. As such, it has underpinned the development 
of digital trade globally. Particularly under the current COVID -19 pandemic, it is important to ensure 
a sound and liberalized environment through e -commerce , and to support safe or less -risky socio -
economic activities.  
6.49.   To discontinue the moratorium at MC12 would be considered a serious step backward not only 
for e-comme rce but for the multilateral trading system.  Japan strongly believes that we should 
maintain our current multilateral practice of the moratorium at MC12, and make it permanent 
eventually.  
6.50.    The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
6.51.   China supports the effort to reinvigorate the Work Programme on electronic commerce and 
we call on Members to have an open and constructive multilateral discussion on e -commerce. We 
also agree to maintain the current practice of moratorium on cu stoms duties on electronic 
transmissions, which should be updated every two years at the Ministerial Conference. This 
moratorium is one of the most important multilateral outcomes for the WTO since 1998, it has 
contributed to the rapid growth of global e -commerce and it helped the WTO to respond to the needs 
of the times and keep the Organization relevant. On the other hand, it is crucial and necessary for 
each Member to maintain necessary policy space. At present, basic consensus on the definition and 
scope of electronic transmissions has not been reached among Members, the impact of the 
permanent moratorium also needs further research, taking into account the development of the WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 72 - 
 
  modern technology. In addition, Members should not be prevented from imposing d omestic taxes 
on electronic transmissions.  
6.52.   MC12 is approaching, considering the divergencies in this issue we suggest that Members 
agree to extend the current practice of not imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions until 
the next Ministerial C onference. We believe this will not only provide certainty to the business 
community but also give us more time for further discussions. Additionally, I want to emphasize that 
further discussion should be very serious, the Members who support the extension  of this 
moratorium, including China, we cannot simply think that this is an issue that we can always take 
for granted, if the further discussions cannot effectively address the concerns expressed by the 
Members, I think maybe the next discussions of the e xtension of the permanent solution will be even 
more difficult.   
6.53.   The representative of Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
6.54.   Regarding the moratorium, my delegation commends your efforts to bridge the gap on this 
issue. As my delegation stre ssed many times, we firmly support the permanent extension of the 
moratorium. It is our view that the moratorium has helped increase the stability and efficiency of 
the e-commerce environment, and at the same time reduced the deadweight loss and also incre ased 
consumer surplus as well as supplier surplus. Moreover, many empirical studies such as the OECD 
report provide evidence to such benefits. In this regard, my delegation hopes that the moratorium 
needs to be extended permanently. Nevertheless, consideri ng that our time is limited, we should 
take a wise and pragmatic approach.  
6.55.   In particular, some Members believe the definition and scope of the moratorium needs to be 
clarified. Some Members are also concerned with how the moratorium causes revenue loss an d the 
reduction in policy space. However, other Members have different views. So, it only makes sense to 
extend the current moratorium while we continue with our discussion to find a better common ground 
among Members. Korea is committed to engaging and wo rking with all Members in a flexible and 
constructive manner to reach a positive conclusion by MC12.  
6.56.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
6.57.   I make this statement on behalf of Ambassador Piracha who had another urgent engagement 
this morning. As indicated yesterday, this statement covers both item 5 .B and this agenda item. 
Pakistan would like to thank you for your report and the consultations held with members on this 
very important subject. We also welcome the proposal from India and South Africa on the subject.  
6.58.   Pakistan is strongly of the view that, we must fulfil our mandate and reinvigorate the 
structured discussions on various aspects of electronic commerce. As highlighted before during this 
meeting, this is one of the mandates  of past M inisterial Conference s which need active and urgent 
attention. It is important that we collectively find solutions for developing members to pressing 
challenges that have been intensified as a result of the C OVID -19 pandemic, such as the digital 
divide, technology transfer, and the effective utilisation of digital raw material to advance digital 
development in those countries.  
6.59.   Structured discussions must be carried out within the various Councils and committees 
mandated to do so on all rel evant aspects. These bodies are the correct and relevant forum for this 
discussion under the WTO and provide a way for a multilateral fulfilment of our mandate. Pakistan, 
like many other developing countries has been making efforts to move forward the disc ussions in 
these mandated bodies, and we urge Members to engage meaningfully and constructively in these 
bodies.  
6.60.   On the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions Pakistan has been 
consistent in its view that a fundamental reassessment of th e situation is required due to new 
technological developments and emerging realities in the digital realm. We also understand that 
without the moratorium, Members may still choose not to impose duties , but it will only allow 
members the critical policy spa ce that they need in this crucial time.  
6.61.   Technology, especially in the digital age, is a powerful enabler. Developing countries lag far 
behind advanced countries in their access to, and utilisation of modern digital technologies. At the WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 73 - 
 
  same time, while ac quiring technological capabilities, developing countries remain cognizant of 
serious revenue and industrial implications arising from digital advancements such as Artificial 
Intelligence and 3 -D printing. We should therefore move for a renewal only after a  conclusive re -
examination on the implications of such developments and the moratorium.  
6.62.   The representative of Zimbabwe  delivered  the following statement:  
6.63.   The benefits in the exponential growth of the digital economy have not been equitably 
distributed due,  in part, to the digital divide. There is growing evidence that the inequitable balance 
in digital trade has resulted in the closure of industries, loss of revenues and jobs in most developing 
countries. Furthermore, the emergence of new technologies such as artificial intelligence and 
blockchain further exacerbates the need for thorough interrogation and analysis to ensure that any 
trade rules offer sufficient scope for equitable growth and benefits in the digital economy.  
6.64.   As we grapple with effects of th e COVID -19 pandemic, e -commerce has been identified in 
enhancing trade and propelling global pandemic recovery to boost economic growth. It is therefore 
vital to maintain a stable and predictable digital trading environment for the benefit of both 
consumer s and producers. Furthermore, there is need for collective efforts in addressing the digital 
divide within and among countries. In line with this, Zimbabwe reiterates its commitment to 
reinvigorate work under the 1998 Work Programme on Electronic Commerce which was established 
to examine all trade -related issues arising from global e -commerce.  
6.65.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
6.66.   The European Union refers to its intervention under item 5.B. the European Union remains 
committed to ongoing discussions on the moratorium. We reiterate our support for extending the 
moratorium - at least until the next Ministerial Conference.  
6.67.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
6.68.   The United States would like to thank the proponents for bringing this issue forward, we would 
agree with many Members that believe the moratorium on customs duties on electronic 
transmissions has supported the rapid growth of digital trade over the past two decades, and we  
continue to believe that WTO Members should be ready to agree to a permanent moratorium. The 
Structured Discussions that were held on July 5 only underscored the importance of continuing the 
moratorium, as both developed and developing countries increase their reliance on digital tools 
during the pandemic response and recovery. The United States would be happy to engage in further 
discussions to explore the clear linkages between demands for open -ended policy space and the 
persistence of the digital divide  among those same Members, you cannot insist on one and be 
surprised by the other.  
6.69.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
6.70.   We would like to thank you Chair for convening consultation on this highly important issue as 
well as for your report under agenda item 5 .B following consultation s. We would like also to thank 
India and South Africa for bringing this agenda item. It is unfortunate that while the growth of the 
digital sector keeps unfolding rapidly while the level of the benefi ts derived from the utilisation of 
the sector as well as the comprehension of its impact to various sectors, particularly between 
developed and developing countries, remain as is. Hence, bearing in mind that the Members have 
agreed to establish a comprehen sive Work Programme to examine all trade related issues rising 
from the global e -commerce in 1998, we remain convinced that the reinvigoration of the work under 
this mandate should continue to be carried out. While reiterating our well known and long -stand ing 
position on the issue of moratorium of custom duties, we would again reiterate that discussion to 
clarify the scope, definition and impact of the custom duties would be imperative prior to agreeing 
to any course of action towards the moratorium.  
6.71.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  delivered the following statement:  
6.72.   The moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions has underpinned a stable, 
predictable and conducive environment for international e -commerce for more than two decades. 
Hong Kong, China all along supports making this moratorium permanent, but i f we cannot forge a WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 74 - 
 
  consensus on this in time by MC12, we believe the moratorium should be extended further until at 
least the following Ministerial Conference. This decision will be crucial to avoiding unnecessary 
disruptions to the global e -commerce envi ronment during this critical time under the pandemic, it 
will also contribute to a speedy post -pandemic global economic recovery.  
6.73.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
6.74.   Singapore' s position on the moratorium on customs duties o n electronic transmission has 
been made abundantly clear in the past G eneral Council  meetings. Singapore strongly supports the 
renewal of the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions. This has been Singapore' s 
long-standing and consistent p osition. One, e-Commerce has been an important driver in supporting 
post-pandemic recovery. Adding barriers to digital trade at this point will inevitably send the wrong 
signal to the international business community, who have moved online during this diff icult period. 
Two, some Members have raised concerns over revenue implications. However, an earlier OECD 
study  (Electronic Transmissions and international trade – shedding new light on the moratorium 
debate, OECD, 2019 ) has clearly shown that the potential revenue losses are small, compared to 
the significantly more substantial economic costs that will be incurred if the moratorium were to 
lapse. Three, this will be an important outcome for the WTO to prove its relevance and demonstrate 
that we are  not anachronistic. Many industry representatives, both large and small, have clearly 
registered the importance of this moratorium during the Public Forum.  
6.75.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
6.76.   Thanks to India and South Africa  for putting this item on agenda and for taking the initiative 
to bring this issue.  My delegation acknowledges that the 1998 Work Program me on Electronic 
Commerce (WT/L/274) is still relevant. To avoid repetition, I refer to my delegation 's statement 
delivered at the GC meeting in March 2021. Bangladesh once again expresses readiness to engage 
in constructive discussion with Members.  
6.77.   The representative of Mongolia  delivered the following statement:  
6.78.   Thank you, India and South Africa, for bringing that agenda  item. It is important for the 
developing countries now, after two decades of the discussion to renew that decision, and many 
experts saying that the recovery of the pandemic will be led by e -commerce and also digital. That 
is important for the developing countries and, therefore, now at MC12 is the right place and the right 
time after two decades seriously discussing to come to consensus on the issue.  
6.79.   The representative of Israel  delivered the following statement:  
6.80.   Israel takes note of the concerns that hav e been voiced here today regarding the moratorium 
on e-commerce and we have full respect to the different views. Having said that, it is our view that 
the moratorium on e -commerce should be extended, this has been Israel's long -standing position 
on this is sue. We believe that the recent developments in the global trading system in the light of 
the COVID -19 pandemic proved how important e -commerce is for the continuation and smooth flow 
of international trade , for the benefit of business es and consumers alik e. Therefore, we are of the 
view that the extension of the moratorium is necessary so as to ensure certainty and stability in the 
global trading system.  
6.81.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
6.82.   India thanks the Chair for keeping this Work Programme discussion on the agenda and also 
engaging bilaterally for consultation on 20 September. We would  like to reiterate that the world is 
still fully grasping the impact of digital technologies becoming wi despread. India has been a 
proponent of strengthening our multilateral work under the non -negotiating and the exploratory 
1998 Work Programme on E-commerce.  
6.83.   Under this multilateral Work Programme and with the intention of understanding the 
implications of the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions, India along with South 
Africa has been introducing submissions in various WTO forums, which explain our understanding of 
the scope and impact of the moratorium. We have been seeking clarity on t he scope of the 
moratorium , without which it is difficult for us to advise our political leadership on the issue.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 75 - 
 
  6.84.   The moratorium has substantial impact both in terms of revenue and policy space and the 
ability to support industrialization, where bulk of th e brunt is borne by developing countries, while 
the benefit largely goes to a few Members , a few developed countries. There have been suggestions 
to substitute tariffs by non -discriminatory internal taxes. But these suggestions do not address the 
associate d concerns, as the two are not exact substitutes of each other. The latter option also does 
not address the issue of erosion of policy space and ability to support domestic industrialization.  
Evidence of last 1 -2 years show that growth in this sector is no t independent on moratorium.  
6.85.   It is incumbent upon the proponents of the moratorium extension to establish a clear and 
direct link providing evidence that the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions 
has had a substantive positive impact on  the development of e-commerce around the world. We 
advocate an evidence -based, data -backed decision on this subject. This will also help us understand 
how the growth of this sector depends on the extension of the moratorium and how will it be affected 
if the moratorium is not renewed.  
6.86.   Let us recollect that in December 2019, we had joined the consensus for six months extension 
of the moratorium, with an understanding that the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce would  
be reinvigorated. The intent was to cl early understand the scope of the moratorium and for the Work 
Programme to underscore the impact of the moratorium on Members ' policy space and revenues. 
However , due to the ongoing pandemic situation, the moratorium has lasted up until the Twelfth 
Ministe rial Conference , but unfortunately despite the availability of time, we have not seen much 
progress in discussions on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. This is an unfortunate 
delay, one that the world can no longer afford given how the digital wor ld is rapidly evolving. We 
reiterate our ask made in the previous General Council meeting that we need a clear understanding 
on the scope of the moratorium and an informed, data -led, evidence -backed decision on the 
extension or otherwise on the moratorium in the upcoming Ministerial Conference.  
6.87.   We firmly and categorically emphasize the importance of multilateralism in a world that faces 
volatility, uncertainty, complexity and ambiguity. The WTO has a unique opportunity to make a 
contribution towards an inclusive and development -oriented approach to electronic commerce rather 
than letting a few Members drive outcomes which may be prejudicial to the global interests. In this 
context, India along with South Africa has also circulated a paper , document  WT/GC /W/812, which 
seeks this Council to play a central role in discussions on the Work Programme; keep this item under 
regular review; take up any trade related issue of a cross -cutting nature; and continue structured 
thematic discussions in the General Counci l through various platforms.  
6.88.   Para 1.2 of the Work Programme mandates that this Council play s a central role in the whole 
process and keep the Work Programme under continuous review through a standing item on its 
agenda. We accordingly urge you to ensure t hat the Work Programme is kept as a standing agenda 
item for the meetings of this Council. We also need to ensure that, as mandate under paragraphs 2 
to 5 of the Work Programme, relevant WTO bodies do engage constructively and report to this 
Council on iss ues assigned to them under the Work Programme, including on the issue of challenges 
to and ways of enhancing the participation of developing countries in electronic commerce, in 
particular as exporters of electronically delivered products;  role of improved  access to infrastructure 
and transfer of technology, and of movement of natural persons; use of information technology in 
the integration of developing countries in the multilateral trading system; implications for developing 
countries of the possible imp act of electronic commerce on the traditional means of distribution of 
physical goods; and financial implications of electronic commerce for developing countries.  
6.89.   India remains open and eager to work on the rejuvenation of the Work Programme on E -
Commerce and work with all likeminded members to drive a constructive outcome in a space which 
will fundamentally influence how the world operates in the times to come. We urge all Members to 
support this Work Programme and come together for joint global good.  
6.90.   The representative of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
6.91.   I think that the idea that we would, in the middle of the fastest transformation of the global 
economy online, from this place, send a signal that we are going to frustrate or inhibit the 
devel opment as our contribution, the WTO's contribution to the response to the pandemic and the 
growth benefits that are delivered, I think that it would be seen as very odd indeed. As to evidence, 
I think the onus is on those who seek to change the status quo to deliver evidence as to how that WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 76 - 
 
  would be a helpful thing. As to agriculture and tariffs in agriculture , I cannot but agree with my 
Indian colleague that it is time for change on that too.  
6.92.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  provided the following statement :  
6.93.   Concerning the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, we appreciate the G eneral Council  
Chair 's leadership in the consultations. We fully support the continued discussions in the relevant 
WTO Committees on e -commerce wor k program in accordance with the December 2019 G eneral 
Council  Decision ( document WT/L/1079) to explore various topics and cross -cutting issues. In 
addition, we are of the view that the current effort at the e -commerce JSI to seek formulating a high 
standa rd discipline on e -commerce , is a complementary track to boost digital trade and bridge the 
digital divide.  
6.94.   Concerning the E-commerce Moratorium, we would like to stress that the priority at this stage 
should be to maintain the 22 -year-old practice of not imposing customs duties on cross -border 
electronic transmissions , and that  the e -commerce moratorium should include the 'contents ' 
transmitted. From the overall economic perspective, the significant benefit from the moratorium to 
the SMEs and MSMEs and to the growth of the global ICT sector and digital economy , has been self -
evident.  
6.95.   We agree that Members should continue discussing the "scope, definition and impact of the 
moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions ". However, such discussion s hould not 
be a condition for Ministers ' decision on extending the moratorium. Time will not wait for us to make 
new rules , especially during the pandemic.   
6.96.   With less than two months to go before MC12, we support that Members should start working 
on a Minis terial Decision on the Work Programme on E -commerce, in which Ministers agree to 
continue and reinvigorate the Work Programme, and to maintain the practice of not imposing 
customs duties on electronic transmissions.  
6.97.   The General Council took note of the statements.  
7  TRADE RELATED CHALLENGES OF THE LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES AND WAY 
FORWARD: A DRAFT FOR MC DECISION – COMMUNICATIONS FROM CHAD ON BEHALF OF 
THE LDC GROUP (WT/GC/W/806/REV.1, WT/GC/W/807 ) 
7.1.  The Chair recalled  that this item had been include d in the agenda at the request of Chad on 
behalf of the LDC Group and was related to the Communications on "Trade Related Challenges of 
the Least Developed Countries and Way Forward" in documents WT/GC/W/806/Rev.1 and 
WT/GC/ W/807, which included a proposed  Draft Ministerial Conference Decision. He further recalled 
that this item had been discussed in the December 2020, March, May and July 2021 General Council 
meetings. Following the LDCs' request, the General Council Chair had facilitated a series of 
consul tations in April and May and had followed up this issue with the LDCs in June, July and 
September.  
7.2.  The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
7.3.  My delegation aligns with the statement that will be delivered by Chad on behalf of the LDC 
Group. The Draft Decision under consideration has proposed that all support measures available to 
LDCs in the WTO shall be extended to all LDCs for a period of twelve years after the effective date 
of graduation from the LDC category.  The Draft Decision also provides that developed and developing 
countries granting unilateral trade preferences to LDCs shall establish procedures for extending 
preferential market access scheme over a period after LDC graduation.  
7.4.  We all are aware that LDCs would normally lose access to all trade -related support measures 
and flexibilities granted to them through the WTO provisions after leaving the group.  We all know 
that graduation overnight will not resolve all their challenges and const raints. Many challenges will 
persist even after leaving the category and graduated countries will continue to need the special 
treatment and policy space to overcome those. Given their limited export base, these countries need 
an extension of LDC -specific preferences for a reasonable period to withstand intense competition 
in trade. These countries need continuation of flexibilities for some time to adjust to new realities of WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 77 - 
 
  their engagements in the trade areas. Moreover, LDCs comprise around 14% of the wo rld population 
but account for around 2% of the world GDP and less than 1% of world trade.  Therefore, extending 
the special treatments to LDCs for a few more years after graduation will not impact the global trade 
as such but would greatly benefit LDCs in their sustainable development.  
7.5.  The UN system recognizes that the supports are needed to be continued for graduated LDCs 
for smooth transition. The UN General Assembly Resolutions 59/209 of 2004 and 67/221 of 2012, 
have rightly invited WTO Members to exten d LDC specific support measures after graduation to help 
them navigate through the transition smoothly. The progress report by the UN S ecretary -General  
on IPOA calls for "stepped -up support for the smooth transition of graduating countries. " In several 
other recent reports also, relevant UN bodies recommended extension of the existing support 
measures to graduating LDCs.   
7.6.  We are saying that the LDCs are demanding nothing new but requesting to continue the 
flexibilities already given to them for a few more y ears to support their smooth transition. We have 
proposed the transition to be for 12 years but at the same time we have been consistently saying 
that the duration is notional, and we are ready to consider different duration, provided the transition 
for gr aduated LDCs is agreed in principle. We are happy that a total 16 countries are now on the 
path of graduation. In addition, 10 other countries have met at least one criterion for graduation 
and many of them are expected to be eligible in the next review in  2024. Evidently, the much -
desired graduation from LDC status has taken a momentum. So, it is the high time to look into the 
challenges of graduating LDCs seriously and support them for sailing through the rough water in the 
initial years of transition.   
7.7.  While our submission received considerable support from a wide range of Members, some 
developed Members have highlighted a number of concerns. The LDC Group has addressed all their 
concerns in details and answered all their questions on numerous occasions: in formal meetings and 
informal and bilateral exchanges. The LDC group is grateful for the exchange opportunities with our 
partners and colleagues during the last few months. We are also grateful to the G eneral Council  
Chair for his consultation with Membe rs on this specific issue and for the input he sent to us from 
his consultations , and we have also held a number of informal consultations facilitated by the General 
Council Chair. We have also reached out to individual delegations and are continuing our o utreach 
to ensure tangible outcomes at MC12. The LDC Group is currently working on all the inputs received 
so far.  The Group is also considering whether an interim arrangement is possible as a practical 
approach to get an outcome on LDC Graduation at MC12.  The LDC Group believes that there should 
be a set of general fundamental principles that would apply to any future package of support 
measures and the benefits shall apply automatically and equally to all LDCs after their graduation 
for a uniform period o f time.  
7.8.  The Group has recently circulated the revised version of the fact sheet on LDC Graduation 
(WT/GC/W/806/Rev.1) updating the information after the most recent triennial review of the LDCs 
by the UN CDP in February  2021. We hope the document will hel p Members better understand the 
situations and the need for continuation of trade related support measures to LDCs after graduation.  
Finally, we think that a favourable decision on LDC graduation will be a good deliverable for MC12.  
It will send a positive  signal to the outside world that WTO is willing to extend helping hands to its 
weakest Members , who are striving to stand on their own feet. This will help boost the image of 
WTO, which has been suffering from a credibility crisis for some time now.  
7.9.  The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
7.10.   We would like to thank the LDC Group for their submission and look forward to continued 
engagement with them as we work to understand this proposal and its potential implications. I can 
however confirm that our concerns and questions have not yet been addr essed. I would refer to 
earlier statements setting out our concerns regarding the equity and fairness in the proposal. To 
conclude, this issue is part of a much wider conversation on the necessary special and differential 
treatment reform and in fact diffe rentiation. That, itself, is part of a larger discussion we have to 
have on the reform of the negotiating function.  
7.11.   We are asking ourselves questions: are the right Members eligible for special and differential 
treatment at the WTO currently? For those Me mbers that should be eligible for special and differential 
treatment,  is their approach to SDT at the WTO coherent and helpful in advancing their long -term WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 78 - 
 
  sustainable development? These are just a few of the questions that we have. We see this as an 
impor tant conversation but not one that we can finish by MC12. We think there is a need and an 
opportunity for pragmatic thinking, and we intend to contribute some of our own. We look forward 
to continued engagement with the proponents and, as we mentioned, a l arger set of Members who 
would be negatively affected by this proposal as part of a broader, longer term conversation on 
reform of SDT and differentiation post -MC12.  
7.12.   The representative of Nepal  delivered the following statement:  
7.13.   My delegation wishes to ali gn with the statement delivered by Chad on behalf of the LDC 
Group, and would like to add some points:  I wish to refer to the statement s delivered by my 
delegation since last December and reiterate all the justifications and arguments shared earlier to 
be considered. Enhanced productive capacity and export competitiveness remain critical pillars for 
the overall socio -economic development of a country. Export has a further role to play in contributing 
to sustainable graduation and achievement of SDGs 2030 in  a timely manner as per the global 
targets.  
7.14.   However, the COVID -19 pandemic impacted LDCs severely , causing multiple challenges in 
their development endeavours including in graduating ones. Sustainable graduation requires 
continuation of LDC -specific suppo rt for certain year s after graduation. This is well -reflected in the 
submission of the LDC Group. Extending the existing support measures for few more years after 
graduation is not a matter of mercy but a matter of global partnership for achieving the glob al 
targets of LDC graduation and achieving SDGs 2030 in a timely and sustainable manner. In addition, 
it would also be helpful in combatting the COVID -19 challenges.  
7.15.   Ensuring a smooth transition has been well -accepted globally , and we urge the WTO 
members hip to positively consider the proposal to ensure smooth transition.  This is not any new or 
additional support graduating LDCs are seeking for but just continuation of flexibilities already given 
to LDCs for a few more years , merely for their smooth transi tion to graduation. It is an important 
aspect of global cooperation and collaboration and is, therefore, incumbent upon the international 
community to support this vulnerable group of economies.   
7.16.   The representative of Mauritius , on behalf of the African Gr oup, delivered the following 
statement:  
7.17.   Least developed countries represent a sizeable part of the African Group Membership. We 
remain very sensitive to their concerns and issues. We therefore call on the WTO Membership to pay 
critical attention to the challenges faced by these countries that have agreed to comply by WTO 
rules and which struggle, and continue to struggle, to emerge from poverty. The pandemic has had 
a special impact on them. We believe there is a need to look at their situation with grea ter flexibility. 
We therefore encourage the continuation of constructive discussions on the issues they have raised 
so that, by December, we may have a decision that provides for a smooth transition process for 
LDCs and that could also extend to LDC -specif ic provisions or technical assistance for a certain period 
of time post -graduation.  
7.18.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
7.19.   The European Union would like to thank the Least Developed Countries (LDC) Group for its 
submiss ion. We have been and will continue engaging on the matter. The European Union is mindful 
of the challenges that LDCs face in integrating in the global trading system. We believe that there 
should be support and flexibilities for WTO Members, commensurate with their needs and capacity 
constraints, beyond the group of LDCs.   
7.20.   The European Union' s support for LDCs is well established, for countries that have recently 
graduated from the LDC status, as well as other developing countries. For example, in the Euro pean 
Union General Scheme of Preferences (GSP), there are transition periods provided for the benefit of 
developing countries, particularly for recently graduated LDCs and other countries most in need.  The 
European Union has also launched a series of trade  agreements with developing countries in Africa, 
including Economic Partnership Agreements which provide very significant preferences. And we also 
engage bilaterally with LDCs with a view to graduation to be able to best support the country during 
and afte r their graduation process.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 79 - 
 
  7.21.   In the area of trade specifically, the aim of the European Union is to focus on how to facilitate 
and enhance the capacity of countries to assume commitments that foster integration in the global 
economy. In our view that is th e best way for the WTO to effectively contribute to sustainable 
development.  
7.22.   We are committed to continue our engagement. That said, this proposal raises a number of 
complex and substantive issues. It is unsure the Membership will be able to finalise our discussions 
by MC12. But it is important for this discussion to continue so that we can understand what the 
needs of the LDC Group are, what their objectives are and how to best address their request.  
7.23.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the follow ing statement:  
7.24.   We associate ourselves with the statement by the Africa Group and by Jamaica on behalf of 
the ACP.  We take the floor to thank the LDC Group for its submission and its continued efforts 
towards a meaningful outcome and recall our previous statements on this issue.  An estimated 
1.06 billion people live in the world 's 47 LDCs and by 2030 over 15% of humanity will be living in 
them. Despite their large demographic weight, LDCs account for less than 1.5% of global GDP. At 
this time of heightened uncertainty, LDCs need special development support more than ever.  
7.25.   Based o n the LDC Group 's well formulated analysis, South Africa reiterates its support for the 
submission in document WT/GC/ W/807 and looks forward to constructive discussions towards a 
decision at MC12 that will ensure continued support to LDCs after graduation.  It's important for the 
multilateral trading system to deliver on issues of interest, especially to vulnerable Members.  
7.26.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
7.27.   The U nited Kingdom  remains alive to the challenges Least Dev eloped Countries face to their 
graduation efforts and remains committed to working with LDCs to ensure they have the tools 
necessary to integrate into the rules -based international trading system.  The U nited Kingdom  
believes that graduation from LDC status  is a positive development and that further integration into 
the multilateral trading system through taking on increasing commitments helps developing 
countries improve their domestic economies.  Like other Members, we would therefore like to see 
more evide nce of why the proposed blanket 12 -year period of continued access to LDC provisions is 
necessary.  
7.28.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
7.29.   Japan believes that SDT is crucial for LDCs to participate in the multilateral trading system 
and that SDT and this extension measure should be granted to those Members who actually need it 
on an as -needed basis. Japan will continue to engage in further discussion toward a consensus.  
7.30.   The representative of Vanuatu, on behalf of the Pacific Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
7.31.   I take the floor on behalf of the Pacific Group to thank the LDC Group for the draft Ministerial 
Decision to support the smooth transition of graduating LDC Members. We also associate ourselves 
with the statement t o be made by the ACP. Apart from the loss of trade preferences and Aid for 
Trade support after graduation, LDCs face ongoing challenges from climate change as well as from 
frequent and severe natural disasters that undermine their development efforts. The Pacific Group 
reiterates its support for this draft decision as it will provide greater certainty and predictability for 
LDC Members through the continuation of market access and Aid for Trade support for twelve years 
after graduation. This is necessary to  facilitate the smooth and successful transition to integrate into 
the multilateral trading system. We therefore encourage Members to support the draft decision.  
7.32.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
7.33.   We thank Chad and the LDC Group  for their proposals contained in document WT/GC/W/807. 
India has unequivocally supported the request by the LDC Group contained in document 
WT/GC/W/807 , for the reasonable duration , as decided by Members by consensus . India remains a 
strong supporter of L DC's integration into the multilateral trading system. India has not only 
contributed to efforts to increase their share in global trade , but has also been a trusted and reliable WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 80 - 
 
  partner. The pandemic has unleashed havoc globally , however the LDCs have bee n the worst hit by 
the pandemic and it has disproportionately impacted their economies . Therefore, they require more 
time to address the severe developmental, technological and health challenges facing them.  India 
urges Members to engage constructively and  expeditiously for an outcome at MC12.  
7.34.   The representative of Jamaica, on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following statement:  
7.35.   The ACP Group continues to pledge its full support for this important submission on behalf of 
the LDC Group. We commend the approach which is being taken to further the interests of LDCs and 
graduated LDCs within the WTO and in the global trading system, especially in light of the impact of 
the COVID -19 pandemic which will have a lasting impact on these Members. The  Group continues 
to believe that graduation is never automatically accompanied by favourable conditions that warrant 
immediate relinquishing of LDC flexibilities. A transition period is of the utmost importance for 
graduating LDCs, and we believe that the proposed transition period in the submission is reasonable 
to allow these Members to face the significant trade and development challenges post -graduation. 
As a group of developing countries and LDCs we can relate to the vulnerabilities of this Group which  
the COVID -19 pandemic has exposed and exacerbated. The Group will look forward to further 
productive engagement on the matter in order to support LDCs, including graduated LDCs, in their 
development aspirations and their efforts to integrate into the mult ilateral trading system. MC12 can 
make this happen.  
7.36.   The representative of China delivered the following statement:  
7.37.   I would like to thank the LDC Group for their renewed  fact sheet  on LDC graduation. The 
discussions we have today are taking place at a criti cal time , when the pandemic has caused more 
severe challenges to graduating LDCs than before. China therefore calls for Members' collective, 
constructive and open -minded engagement in the discussions. China is willing to work with all 
Members to find a lan ding zone or a way forward.   
7.38.   The representative of Senegal delivered the following statement:  
7.39.   Senegal endorses the statement made on behalf of the African Group. The graduation of a 
country from the LDC status is an important step in the process of its dev elopment. It indicates the 
economic and social progress made by a country over recent years. However, the challenges that 
LDCs face after graduation lead to the brutal loss of benefits through certain international support 
measures such as reinforced techn ical assistance, preferential market access and special and 
differential treatment come about once they graduate. Therefore, to not compromise the progress 
made by graduating LDCs, a transition process is necessary. This is why we support the processes 
put forward by Chad, the LDC Group coordinator. We hope that trade -related support measures can 
be continued for twelve years following graduation form LDC status.  
7.40.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
7.41.   We align ourselves with the st atement by Mauritius on behalf of the African Group and by 
Jamaica on behalf of the ACP. We thank the LDC Group for their proposal and we wish to reaffirm 
our support for that proposal. We urge all Members to do the same in view of the trade related 
challe nges being faced by LDCs and for them to continue to benefit from the multilateral trading 
system.  
7.42.   The representative of Turkey  delivered the following statement:  
7.43.   We would like to reiterate our support to the idea that a smooth transition is necessary for 
the LDCs after graduation. This is especially crucial given the effects of the current pandemic.  We 
should make graduation a case for celebration rather than a source of concern. For that, we need to 
work on the details of this proposal.  
7.44.   We have noted at previous meetings some important questions from members. Turkey 
believes that the LDC Group can move forward this proposal once comprehensive responses to these 
questions are provided.  We sincerely hope that discussions on this proposal can go further and 
achieve results. We do also hope that trade can continue to assist LDCs in their development and 
integration to the world economy.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 81 - 
 
  7.45.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
7.46.   In light of time limitations, and as all other speakers have already taken the floor on this 
matter, I would simply like to warmly thank all Members who weighed in on this matter. I wish to 
thank you for supporting our proposal. Rest assure d that we stand ready to continue  our reflexion 
on how to best provide responses to those Members who clearly stated their concerns , which I fully 
understand. As always, we stand ready to continue our discussion with you, and we hope to be able 
to reach consensus on this matter; that is o ur aim, what we are working towards. I think we need 
all Members' support and understanding in order to ensure that we truly reach consensus in these 
discussions.  
7.47.   The Director -General  provided the following statement:  
7.48.   The words of the Ambassador from Chad have really inspired me to say something. This is 
one of those areas where I would really urge Members to have a constructive approach. Graduation 
is not a new thing , it is normal in almost every institution that one knows about. In fact, there are 
some st andard periods in many organisations, but of course this is different. We are talking of LDCs 
in the trading environment. As ma ny have said, they have been hard -hit by the pandemic. 
Nevertheless, I think we should also look at good practices elsewhere and have a reasonable and 
constructive dialogue on this. This is one of those areas where, I think, we should not have a long -
drawn -out debate. Surely, there are reasonable compromises that can be made on this issue. I am 
very encouraged by what the Ambassador  from Chad said about the willingness to answer questions 
to be constructive to search for a middle ground. I would really like to urge that. This would be a 
good thing to accomplish if all come to a very sensible landing zone.   
7.49.   The General Council took note of the statements.  
8  SUPPORTING THE CONCLUSION OF FISHERIES SUBSIDIES NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE 
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE OCEAN AND FISHING COMMUNITIES - DRAFT MINISTERIAL 
DECISION - COMMUNICATION FROM BRAZIL (WT/GC/W/815)  
8.1.  The Chair recalled  that this  item had been included in the agenda of the General Council for 
the third time, at the request of  Brazil, together with the communication in document WT/GC/W/815.   
8.2.  The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
8.3.  The FAO has estimated that 34% of fis h stocks worldwide were overfished in 2020. And, each 
year, governments spend an estimated 22 billion dollars on capacity -enhancing subsidies that 
artificially lower fishing costs.  Consequently, the percentage of fish stocks within biologically 
sustainable  levels has been dropping continuously. This deterioration has a serious impact on the 
livelihoods of millions of people who depend on fishing resources.  That is why we must have a sense 
of urgency and start real negotiations that can lead us to conclude a n agreement with the highest 
component of sustainability.  
8.4.  Reaching an agreement would show that the WTO can deal with pressing current issues - such 
as the intersection between trade and sustainability.  If we are not able to reach an agreement by 
MC12, we need to be realistic about the prospects of this dossier at the WTO.  It will send a negative 
message about our collective will to deal with the new realities of trade.  We will, also, have to explain 
why we couldn 't come up with an agreement after 20 years of negotiations. We look forward to 
working constructively with Members on this matter.  
8.5.  The representative of the Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
8.6.  The Philippines welcomes Brazil' s proposal for Members to commit to delivering on 
environmental sustainability in concluding the multilateral agreement on fisheries subsidies 
negotiations, for the benefit of the ocean and fishing communities. This is consistent with the main 
objective of fisheries sustainability under SDG 14.6, with the  15 July Ministerial guidance and 
directive, as well as with the recent call of no less than UN Secretary General Ant ónio Guterres to 
push for an agreement at the WTO to end harmful fisheries subsidies before the end of the year.   WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 82 - 
 
  8.7.  We further highlight the need to recognize that appropriate and effective special and differential 
treatment for developing and least developed countries should be an integral part of the 
negotiations.  
8.8.  The representative of Mauritius, on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
8.9.  We would like to thank the delegation of Brazil once again for circulating document 
WT/GC/W/815. The African Group reiterates its statement made at the last General Council and once 
again would like to express its commitment to the con clusion of a balanced outcome on fisheries 
subsidies in the direction of sustainability. This being said, the African Group remains deeply attached 
to the issue of sustainability as a central pillar of the fisheries negotiations.  
8.10.   A suggestion in the direction that Mauritius would like to make is that we consider having a 
review of the Agreement after a certain number of years to look at whether the response or the 
expectations that we had of eliminating harmful subsidies takes place. Once we have conc luded the 
Agreement, I think it will not be right for us just to go away and forget about it. It might be useful 
a number of years after that to take that sustainability test to see whether we have actually achieved 
in having fish stocks restored and if no t, then what further measures are required on our part.  
8.11.   The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
8.12.   We echo the same aspiration in fulfilling the mandates, in reaching a meaningful agreement 
that would curb harmful fisheries subsidies  that deplete our global maritime fish stocks, while 
advocating the importance of environmental sustainability.  We would also like to thank Ambassador 
Santiago Wills for conscientiously moderating numerous engagements in various settings. This is a 
pertine nt step in advancing the negotiations, while we strive to narrow the gap between Members 
in reaching the common goal as we envisioned.  
8.13.   Malaysia has continuously reiterated our commitment to conclude the negotiations as soon 
as possible, and to a certain e xtent, be flexible in reaching middle ground. From what we have 
observed in these recent months, there has been a significant divergence among Members ' positions 
in various issues. We are of the view that the direction of the negotiations remained ambivale nt, 
mainly in the areas where we have ascertained our concerns, particularly on the inclusion of non -
specific fuel subsidies, imbalanced and limited scope of SDT, as well as the burdensome transparency 
mechanism.  
8.14.   Nevertheless, we are optimistic and look f orward to a substantially improved consolidated 
draft text that will address these pertinent concerns, and embed the importance of positioning 
fisheries in the context of food security and national economy, especially for the developing and 
least-developed  Members. We also appreciate the textual proposals by Members in the recent 
meetings, where some of these proposals contain merits in finding convergence among Members.  
8.15.   As we have underscored at the previous General Council meeting, the outcome of this 
negotiations must preserve the WTO principles of non -discriminatory trade, predictability and 
transparency, fair competition, and encouraging development and economic reform. Malaysia 
remains committed towards fulfilling the mandate to expeditiously achieve a  meaningful agreement 
on fisheries subsidies.  
8.16.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
8.17.   Chad would like to thank Brazil for this proposal. The LDC Group is in favour of a positive 
outcome for our fisheries negotiations. We hope to see a balanced and fair outcome, one which 
prohibits harmful fisheries subsidies while including of course the necessary flexibilities to ensure 
that LDCs can develop their fishing activities. To conclude, I would like to  note that fisheries is 
amongst our key priorities alongside the other ones we have mentioned earlier. Fisheries 
negotiations are of great concern for the LDC Group.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 83 - 
 
  8.18.   The representative of Jamaica, on behalf the ACP Group , delivered the following statement:  
8.19.   The ACP Group wishes to recall its previous statements on this agenda item. The Group 
prioritizes the sustainability of our oceans. We believe that an outcome on fisheries subsidies should 
be an effective tool in the global fight against IIU fishing and g lobal fish stocks depletion. As WTO 
Members, we trust in the WTO Membership to always be mindful, but the WTO's competence  in this 
area is limited to subsidies and, to the extent possible, to collaboration with other international 
organizations that have m andates in oceans and fisheries management. Our focus and priority 
should be to conclude the negotiations through the NGR process.  
8.20.   We also want to remind Members that we do already have a Ministerial Mandate which we 
believe is sufficient to guide the wor k in the negotiations. Our Ministerial Mandate is also in line with 
SDG 14.6 as agreed by heads of states and governments. The Group also reaffirms its commitments 
to the implementation of SDG 14.6 and the MC11 mandate. We believe that the focus of our 
engagement should be on major subsidizers and large -scale industrial fishing, we must ensure that 
the outcome provides adequate policy space for developing countries and LDCs to develop their 
fisheries sector that will go beyond transition periods and technic al assistance and capacity building. 
We also wish to reemphasize that an outcome must ensure that the sovereign rights of Members 
are respected, national judicial processes are accepted, implementation is not more burdensome 
than the necessary to achieve o ur sustainability objectives, the provisions remain within the 
competence of the WTO and there is policy space for small scale and artisanal fishing. We are fully 
committed to concluding the negotiations by MC12 and our engagement in the NGR is reflective of 
this goal, for this to happen, flexibility and compromise from all parties are key ingredients to getting 
this done.  
8.21.   The representative of Ukraine  delivered the following statement:  
8.22.   Ukraine would like to thank Brazil for preparing a draft Ministerial Decision on the importance 
of concluding fisheries subsidies. We also have to extend our appreciation to Ambassador Santiago 
Wills for  his enormous efforts and active role during the consultation process.  Ukraine reaffirms its 
commitment to conc lude negotiations on fisheries subsidies as soon as possible in order to preserve 
the world 's fish stocks, ensure food security and the well -being of coastal communities.  Ukraine 
expresses its readiness to cooperate constructively in order to finalize the text on fisheries subsidies.  
8.23.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
8.24.   We thank again Brazil for attracting our collective attention to the draft Ministerial Decision 
on fisheries subsidies negotiations. Of course, we share the endeavour  of the proponents to reach a 
meaningful outcome by the 12th Ministerial Conference. Howev er, we think that our substantial 
engagement on this matter should be continued within the Negotiating Group on Rules.  Having said 
that, we would like to remind that Members are yet to resolve fundamental substantial differences. 
As we stated at the TNC me eting, we need to concentrate on developing clear, targeted and 
implementable disciplines rather than promoting over -abundantly far -reaching and ambiguous 
prohibitions, which necessitate a whole box of exemptions.  And we call upon some Members to 
abandon attempts to use these negotiations as a means to promote their political agenda. We must 
embrace a multilateral mindset and work together in a consensus -seeking spirit on the road to MC12.  
8.25.   The representative of Vanuatu, on behalf of the Pacific Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
8.26.   We reiterate the statement made in the last General Council meeting. We recognize the 
urgency to complete this negotiation, which is a top priority for the Pacific Group. We are engagi ng 
actively and constructively to conclude the negotiations by the end of October as set out in the NGR 
Chair's work plan. The Pacific Group is committed to delivering a meaningful outcome on fisheries 
subsidies at MC12, this agreement must focus on discer ning harmful subsidies and not fisheries 
management, it must also provide policy space for small developing countries and especially small 
island developing states that have little to no fishing cap in the present, provide livelihood securities 
through exc eptions of small scale and artisanal sector and should not undermine Members' rights 
under UNCLOS to offer access to fishing in the EEZ on terms they decide.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 84 - 
 
  8.27.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
8.28.   South Africa aligns itself w ith the interventions made on behalf of the African Group and ACP.  
We would like to thank Brazil for their submission as entailed in document WT/GC/W/815.  As stated 
previously, we are guided by the Ministerial mandates, including of MC11, as well as SDG 14 .6 in 
the Fisheries negotiations. The proposed Draft Ministerial Declaration does not seem appropriately 
aligned to all the aspects of the mandate. In particular, it does not make reference to SD T, which is 
a critical element of the mandate. We continue to hold the view that the principle of common but 
differentiated responsibility should underpin the negotiations.  
8.29.   We are engaging constructively in the Fisheries negotiations with the view to addres s the 
imbalances in the Chairs text. In our view, the incorporation of elements provided in the recent joint 
proposal by the African Group and the ACP Group would go a long way in this regard and would set 
a good basis for the negotiations. We will reflect  on Mauritius'  proposal for a review  clause . 
8.30.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
8.31.   We associate ourselves with the statement by Mauritius on behalf of the African Group and 
Jamaica on behalf of the ACP. This is an Agreement that is overdue to be concluded after 20 years. 
In recent times so much has been discussed, so much has been done , but still some divergencies 
exist. We have spoken in several meetings with total commitment that we need to see the fisheries 
subsidies concluded as soon as possible. We must as Members do our best to show more flexibility 
with the view to address the remaining gaps so that this Agreement would be one of the major 
outcomes of the MC12, to serve the integrity of the Organization  and to put these long -standing 
discussions on fisheries subsidies in the past.  
8.32.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
8.33.   The f isheries subsidies discussion is important for us, particularly for the LDCs located at 
coastal areas and islands. It is related to our development priorities, poverty reduction, livelihoods 
and food security concerns. We must be able to conclude the negotiation securing adequate SDT 
provisions and other policy space for developing countries, particularly for the LDCs.  My de legation 
thanks the delegation of Brazil for this Draft Ministerial Decision contained in document 
WT/GC/W/815 and their statement made today. On this issue, my delegation reiterates that bringing 
any new mandate at this point of discussion may make the si tuation complex. Concluding the 
fisheries negotiation at the WTO is our long pending collective responsibility that we must carry out 
before MC -12. On this issue, Bangladesh is ready to constructively engage with Members.  
8.34.   The representative of Ecuador  delivered the following statement:  
8.35.   We thank Brazil and take note of this as well as of the statement made this morning. My 
country has been calling for a fisheries subsidies agreement which helps to protect our oceans' 
sustainability and ensure food security a nd livelihoods for thousands of people. We welcome the 
efforts and dynamic approach championed by the DG helping us to reach an Agreement by MC12. 
We appreciate your commitment and your energy is contagious. We will continue to strive for a 
significant agr eement, bearing in mind the views of all states ensuring that we have generalized 
standards based on clear objective disciplines, bearing in mind the special responsibilities of 
subsidized industrial fishing and the needs of small scale and artisanal fishe rs. We also would like to 
see SDT that is in line with the protection and sustainability aims. The D irector -General 's letter 
recently sent , came at the best possible time. Bearing this in mind, we will continue to support the 
work of Ambassador Santiago Wi lls as he Chairs this negotiating group.  
8.36.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
8.37.   The United States remains committed to working with Members to achieve a meaningful 
outcome by MC12 that protects our oceans and supports ou r fishers and workers. We would highlight 
our efforts to ensure that an agreement on fisheries subsidies contributes to Members ' efforts to 
highlight and address the use of forced labour on fishing vessels. Our targeted approach, with a 
focus on the disciplines that are already under negotiation, is an important way the agreement can 
positively impact our fishers and workers.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 85 - 
 
  8.38.   The United States stands ready to work with Members to find solutions on other key issues, 
like special and differential treatment, but all Members need to be serious about finding such 
solutions. We will reflect on the suggestion made earlier by Mauritius, bu t we do know that it does 
assume that we can reach an agreement that actually covers a respectable number of Members and 
actually changes the status quo and that remains elusive to this date. We are concerned that some 
recent discussions and certain propos als have served to move our work in the wrong direction in 
terms of getting closer to a meaningful outcome. For example, a blanket approach to special and 
differential treatment with permanent carveouts is neither appropriate nor effective given the 
purpos e of this agreement. It also does not reflect the reality that some self -declared developing 
country Members are among the largest producers and subsidizers. We have an opportunity to 
produce an agreement that can make a serious and credible contribution t o ending harmful fisheries 
subsidies. We have limited time before MC12, and all Members must make and support 
improvements to the text if we are to reach a meaningful outcome.  
8.39.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
8.40.   We thank Brazil f or its communication regarding the draft Ministerial decision on supporting 
the conclusion of fisheries subsidies negotiations for the sustainability of the ocean and fishing 
communities, contained in document WT/GC/W/815.  India wishes to recall its earlie r statements on 
this item.   
8.41.    India remains fully committed to the negotiations on fisheries subsidies as provided under 
SDG 14.6 and MC11 mandates. Let me reiterate once more that effective and appropriate SDT is an 
integral part of these negotiations. This must ensure the developmental and future policy space 
needs of countries with negligible industrial fishing fleet and LDCs , so as to develop their fisheries 
sector and to provide equitable opportunities to harness fisheries resources in all geographic zones, 
including in high seas. This SDT will be in line with the objectives mentioned in the preamble to the 
Marrakesh Agreement , which recognizes a need for positive efforts designed to ensure that 
developing countries, especially the least  developed among them , secure a share in the field of trade 
and economic endeavour with a view to raising standards of living with their respective needs and 
concerns at different levels of economic development.   
8.42.   In the TNC meeting held on 15 July 2021, ma ny Members raised concerns regarding the 
imbalance in the draft text and suggested the way out to bring balance by incorporating the principle 
of 'polluter pays' and 'common but differentiated responsibility ' in formulating the disciplines. To 
have a balan ced outcome, India has submitted a comprehensive proposal in document 
RD/TN/RL/147 on Article 5 of the draft text , keeping in view the demands of developing countries 
and LDCs on SDT for future policy space , to diversify and develop the fishing sector sust ainably , 
especially in the high seas , where many of these countries generally lack presence. Further, there 
is a need for SDT in the form of carve -outs for low income, resource -poor and livelihood fishing or 
fishing related activities up to coastal Members ' EEZ (200 nautical miles).  
8.43.   The sustainability of the ocean 's marine resources is at the core of the disciplines being 
negotiated and it 's a shared responsibility for all. Keeping in line with this understating, India in 
document RD/TN/RL/147 has suggested  moratorium of 25 years on the subsidies provided by the 
distant water fishing nations for fishing or fishing -related activities beyond their Exclusive Economic 
Zone, as this type of fishing is the most harmful and cannot be continued without huge subsidie s, 
either for construction of large industrial vessels or allowing these vessels with subsidised fuel to 
exploit the high seas and waters of other countries. We believe this prohibition will be the real step 
towards sustainability, which is the main object ive of the ongoing negotiations.  
8.44.    To conclude, let me assure you that India is fully committed to having disciplines on harmful 
fisheries subsidies by MC12 if the demands of developing countries having negligible industrial 
fishing fleet , and LDCs , on SDT , for future policy space to diversify and develop the fishing sector 
sustainably, including in the high seas.  
8.45.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
8.46.   We wish to recall and echo our previous statements under this item. As p ointed out by many, 
we are hopeful of a conclusion of the ongoing fisheries negotiations. We thank Brazil for this proposal 
and draft Ministerial Decision. Fisheries subsidies are one of the most important elements of WTO WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 86 - 
 
  negotiations, carried over from th e Doha Agenda. The proposal itself is difficult to comprehend on 
several counts. For instance, how would this Draft Ministerial Decision relate to a positive conclusion 
of the negotiations at MC12 under the NGR? At the same time, while affirming commitment  to SDG 
14.6, the Draft Decision appears to reduce the mandate to only a higher standard of environmental 
sustainability. Environmental sustainability is an important objective, we must address all aspects 
of sustainable development to make it truly meanin gful and understand sustainability in its true 
sense , with the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, i.e. to curtail actually harmful 
subsidies of largescale industrial, fishing activities and provide policy space for developing countrie s, 
particularly their small scale artisanal fishing activities. The Draft Decision also does not mention 
this most crucial aspect of special and differential treatment, which is the core of SDG 14.6. Pakistan 
looks forward to a balanced and meaningful outc ome at MC12 on fisheries , which delivers on our 
complete Ministerial mandate and that of SDG 14.6.  
8.47.   The representative of Chile delivered the following statement:  
8.48.   We had not stated our position on this proposal, the objective of which we certainly support. 
We preferred to have this discussion in the negotiating group. However, we have noticed that we 
are losing sight of sustainability in these negotiations. It would seem that we do not all agree with 
the premise that no one wants subsidies for unsus tainable fishing.  The outcome we achieve would 
have to pass the sustainability "test", taking into account all the provisions of the agreement, 
including the flexibilities so sought after by major subsidizers, such as special and differential 
treatment.  
8.49.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
8.50.   We would like to stress and confirm our commitment in concluding the fisheries subsidies 
negotiations to finally deliver on our 14.6 SDG mandate. At this juncture, my delegation believes 
that our focus should be placed to negotiate the draft text discipline. We believe that there are many 
aspects of this proposal that need to be looked at and negotiated to reflect divergent points of views 
concerning the discipline. We believe that fisheries s ubsidies is beyond sustainability issues and as 
it has been mentioned by many it is also about SDT, an integral part of the mandate. Hence, it is 
about the livelihood of people especially of small scale and artisanal fishermen. Therefore, we believe 
that s ignalling out one specific issues in the draft will not reflect the real discussion of the discipline. 
We are concerned that if we try to discuss this proposal at this point of time it could decelerate our 
negotiation process.  
8.51.   The representative of Chinese  Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
8.52.   We have observed many positive interactive textual discussions in the past weeks which help 
minimize the gaps under the leadership of Ambassador Wills. We trust that our Chair of fisheries 
subsidies negotiation will come up with needed approach to tackle the most difficult parts and to 
lead us toward a successful outcome in fisheries subsidies negotiation, which is agreed upon by all 
Members as the indispensable part of MC1 2. If we can successfully reach a final conclusion of a 
multilateral agreement on fisheries subsidies, we will not need to have this proposed Ministerial 
Decision adopted any more.   
8.53.   We also thank Mauritius who just made a suggestion on including some 'review mechanism ' 
to resolve the difficulties that we are encountering now. In previous discussions, including at the 
HoDs discussion on Articles 5.1.1 and 5.5 on 14 September this year, I made statements in relation 
to SDT , saying that any exemption is not to  create any enduring and long -lasting negative impact 
on fisheries sustainability , and that if we decide not to set a time limit for Article 5.5 (b) in ALT 2, it 
might be desirable to have a periodic review mechanism, not for reviewing the fulfilment  of 
obligations, but for the purpose of observing or monitoring the situation of relevant fish stocks and 
to send signal to the subsidizing Members to urge them to address the deteriorating situation.  
8.54.   Mauritius'  suggestion of a review mechanism might be broader than our suggestion , so as to 
apply to other provisions to periodically review their operation to prevent any enduring and long -
lasting negative impact on fisheries sustainability arising from any provision of this agreement. I 
believe Mauritius'  suggestio n deserves more in -depth discussions and consideration.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 87 - 
 
  8.55.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
8.56.   The European Union fully supports an outcome that is ambitious and ensures sustainability. 
This negotiation is about the sustainability of fish stocks. The mandate does includes special and 
differential treatment (SDT). But SDT is not an objective per se. SDT is aimed to facilitate the 
implementation of disciplines, namely: to achieve the sustainability of fish stocks. SDT is not 
envisaged as a way to build a fisheries sector on the basis of harmful subsidies.  
8.57.   The European Union thanks the Chair of the Rul es Negotiating Group for his efforts to steer 
us to concrete and positive outcomes. We all have responsibilities to ensure that harmful subsidies 
are discontinued and that fisheries continue to provide food and jobs for current and future 
generations. This  negotiation cannot be about 'common but no responsibilities for many '. We have 
to do all we can to come up with a meaningful outcome for MC12. It would be very negative for the 
reputation of this Organisation if we failed to meet the deadline that all Hea ds of State have asked 
us to deliver.  
8.58.   The representative of Japan provided the following statement:  
8.59.   Japan understands Brazil' s idea of the Ministerial Decision for encouraging Members to get an 
agreement in a timely manner. However, it is clear that all Members are cognizant of urgency of our 
work. We should put all our time and energy in the text -based negotiation at a Head of Delegation 
level under the leadership of the Chair, Ambassador  Wills, rather than working on this Draft 
Ministerial Decision. We hope that our intensive work based on the text can help us conclude this 
negotiation as soon as possible prior to MC12.  
8.60.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
9  PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR WTO COUNCILS AND COMMITTEES ADDRESSING TRADE 
CONCERNS – COMMUNICATION FROM ALBANIA; AUSTRALIA; CANADA; CHINA; EUROPEAN 
UNION; HONG KONG, CHINA; ICELAND; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA; 
NEW ZEALAND; NORTH MACEDONIA; NORWAY; PANAMA; QATAR; SINGAPORE; 
SWITZERLAND; THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND 
MATSU; THAILAND; TURKEY; AND UKRAINE (WT/GC/W/777/REV.6)  
9.1.  The Chair recalled that this item had been  included in the agenda of the General Council for 
the tenth time, at the request of  the European Union, together with the revised  proposal in 
WT/GC/W/777/Rev.6.  
9.2.  The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
9.3.  On behalf of all co -sponsors, the European Union would like to provide an update about our 
work on the proposal for "Procedural Guidelines for WTO Councils and Committees Addressing Trade 
Concerns". This proposal fits into the context of the reform agenda, acknowledging that the WTO 's 
monitoring and deliberative function is in need of change, too.  To recall, this proposal aims to 
improve how Members address each other 's trade concerns in regular WTO bodies, including 
meetings arrangements.  
9.4.  In July, the co -sponsors of the proposal have presented a revision as a n honest attempt to 
take account of Members ' comments and concerns. And w e thank those Members who have provided 
their views and hope that Members have had time to review this revised version more in -depth.  
More efficient meeting arrangements have become a necessity in a time where the pandemic brought 
fundamental change to the  working methods of our Committees. We feel that there is a lot of 
common ground on the first part of the proposal on meeting arrangements. In fact, some ideas have 
already been taken up and put into practice.  
9.5.  In July, several Members expressed their doub ts as regards the feasibility of a horizontal 
approach on how to address trade concerns.  The co -sponsors acknowledge the diversity of the WTO 
Committee system and the importance for each committee to regularly look for improvements and 
efficiencies in thei r own procedures and working methods. However, we are also convinced that 
there are cross -cutting issues that all committees face and where non -binding guidelines could lead 
to improvements across the board. The proposal does not suggest a 'one size fits a ll' type of WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 88 - 
 
  harmonisation. It rather encourages the establishment of a common platform based on some core 
principles, as a complement to the specificities of each WTO Committee. However, co -sponsors are 
open to consider further, how the horizontal approach could be best complemented by a Committee -
by-Committee approach. We would welcome Members ' views in this regard.   
9.6.  Some Members raised concerns as regards possible addi tional burdens. Let me dispel these 
doubts once again. The aim of the proposal is not to create additional burden. Quite the opposite, it 
aims at facilitating engagement, for example by providing non -binding guidance on how to handle 
written questions, whi le maintaining flexibilities to account of individual circumstances. Likewise, 
capital -based participation is suggested – not imposed - in possible informal bilateral consultations 
as a means to go deeper, and maybe better, into the concerns raised. Actuall y, the combination of 
Geneva -based and remote engagement has become a day -to-day reality after COVID . Similarly, the 
database in paragraph 8 aims at facilitating Members ' overview of ongoing discussions of trade 
concerns and thereby decreasing administrati ve burden.  
9.7.  Finally, the co -sponsors would like to emphasize that the proposal is voluntary in nature. It 
does not aim in any way to limit Members ' ability to raise trade concerns as they see fit. However, 
we are open to discuss textual suggestions that pr ovide further reassurance in this respect. The co -
sponsors remain committed to advancing this proposal. We are looking forward to stepping up 
outreach and informal exchanges with Members with a view to finding common ground soon.  
9.8.  The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
9.9.  We would like to thank the E uropean Union for the introduction. It is something that we have 
carefully reviewed and we 've had a number of constructive discussions about it with the EU and 
other proponents. To be clear, we share the proponents ' objectives – to rebuild the norms for 
Members to resp ond to and address the trade concerns raised by other Members. As we have noted 
previously, these norms have eroded, and I think we share that view with the proponents. We believe 
the key culprit appears to be some Members ' lack of interest and political w ill to address such 
concerns. Fundamentally, for us the problem is substantive, not procedural. We also recognize that, 
in some Committees, the procedures probably can be and should be improved. For example, relevant 
documents for an agenda item should be shared at the moment that the agenda is circulated, and 
not after. It is difficult to have a meaningful discussion on a document that was circulated just a few 
days before a meeting.  
9.10.   Still, as we reviewed the proposal, we are reminded that WTO committees are quite diverse, 
and few solutions can be applied horizontally. Procedural changes that may help in one Committee 
may undermine what is already working in another Committee. For this reason, we continue to have 
some concerns with the approach coming from  the General Council.  
9.11.   In response to the EU's intervention about the complementarity, we would propose that 
stepping back does not necessarily mean that Members must be silent at MC12 about this issue. So, 
taking that complementary bridge that was offered , one suggestion might be that as a first step 
Ministers at MC12 could direct each Committee or body to review its rules of procedures and 
undertake appropriate actions with a view to improve its effectiveness. The suggestions in the 
proposal could be the basis for that discussion and could form the basis of a Ministerial 
recommendation. We think that such an approach would allow for Committee -specific approaches 
and build up from the bottom to see where individual Committees may want to make changes to 
then see, at the end of that process, whether or not we would have horizontal outcomes.  
9.12.   So, if we could link the two concerns , with the need for some horizontal approach with our 
desire to have protection for those Committees that do work well , or accommodat ion for those 
Committees that do work differently, if we could combine our two approaches in something that 
could be an MC12 deliverable , I think we would be more than happy to work along those lines.  
9.13.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
9.14.   Our group supports the idea of the Director -General to create a working group on the reform 
of the WTO. Our proposal as well as the Declaration of the LDCs , should be included in discussions 
that will go forward from MC 12. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 89 - 
 
  9.15.   The representative of Ukraine  delivered the following statement:  
9.16.   We would like to thank E uropean Union for the efforts and we are in favour of keeping this 
item on the agenda.  From Ukraine 's perspective, one of the key challenges for the WTO today is t o 
find a way to ensure efficient and needs -based mechanism of dealing with trade concerns. Ukraine 
welcomes the important objectives outlined in the document.  Searching for potential options and 
possible 'doable ' solutions to improve trade concerns practice and strengthen the work of regular 
bodies , would have a positive impact on the Membership and its stakeholders.  
9.17.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
9.18.   We thank the E uropean Union for the updates and clarifications of the proposal. We hope the 
clarifications have eased the concerns some Members might have. We believe the basic procedural 
guidelines in the proposal with non -binding and voluntary nature can facilitate and complement  each 
Committee 's work. The proposal can be a concrete step to improve the WTO 's monitoring and 
deliberative function , in support of the future reform of the WTO.  As one of the co -sponsors of this 
proposal, we are committed to continuing to explore effecti ve ways to promote the efficiency of 
WTO's daily work in addressing Members ' specific trade concerns.  
9.19.   We also agree with the United States that, not merely the procedures, but the substance is 
also the problem, which needs to be addressed in the future. We  also agree with the U nited States 
that we need to consider different situations of different committees. I trust that under the leadership 
of the E uropean Union, new inputs will be incorporated into the proposal.  
9.20.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
9.21.   We tha nk the E uropean Union for the revised proposal.  We wish to recall our previous 
statements in this submission, including at the last G eneral Council  in July 2021.  We remain 
concerned with the horizontal application of this proposal. Addressing specific trad e concerns (STCs) 
is provided for under certain agreements. We believe that it is better to leave this issue to each 
regular body that will consider it in accordance with its rules and mandate.  
9.22.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following state ment:  
9.23.   The delegation of Bangladesh thanks Chad for statement on behalf of the LDC group. 
Bangladesh thanks the proponents of this communication and welcomes the constructive ideas in 
the proposal. We have been discussing this proposal for quite some time. My delegation previously 
pointed out the concerns on the proposed provision in paragraph 10 of the draft regarding 
participation of capital -based experts through video conferencing. All LDCs are not in a position and 
internet connection is still a severe c hallenge in many of our countries. On this issue, Bangladesh 
looks forward to engaging constructively with the proponents.   
9.24.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
9.25.   We have conveyed our concerns on the proposal in the earlier meetings.  Our position on this 
matter remains the same.  For the sake of time, we are not repeating this again today.  
9.26.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
9.27.   My delegation appreciates the EU 's intervention on behalf of co -sponsors. As a way of 
overseeing the implementation of WTO Agreements, Members continue to raise trade concerns in 
WTO Councils and Committees. Korea agrees on the need to operate this mechanism in a more 
systematic and efficient way.   
9.28.   The rev ised proposal provides a set of non -binding and appropriate guidelines to this end. It 
facilitates engagement of concerned Members by setting out relevant procedures and specific periods 
to them. Circulating documents for formal meetings in advance, which is being implemented in some 
Committees, is another good element to improve the operation of this mechanism.  My delegation 
encourages Members to support this proposal and is ready to work together towards the consensus 
on this proposal.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 90 - 
 
  9.29.   The General Council  took note  of the statements.  
10  PROPOSED GENERAL COUNCIL DECISION ON PROCEDURES TO ENHANCE 
TRANSPARENCY AND IMPROVE COMPLIANCE WITH NOTIFICATION REQUIREMENTS 
UNDER WTO AGREEMENTS – ARGENTINA; AUSTRALIA; CANADA; CHILE; COSTA RICA; THE 
EUROPEAN UNION; ISRAEL; JAPAN; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; MEXICO; NEW ZEALAND; 
NORWAY; THE PHILIPPINES; SINGAPORE; SWITZERLAND; THE SEPARATE CUSTOMS 
TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU; UNITED KINGDOM; AND THE 
UNITED STATES (JOB/GC/204/REV.7 - JOB/CTG/14/REV.7)  
10.1.   The Chair recall ed that this item had been  included in the agenda of the General Council by 
the United States, together with the communication in document JOB/GC/204/Rev. 7 – 
JOB/CTG/14/Rev. 7; and that the proposal had been included  in the agenda of the July meeting, with 
the previous version of the communication .  
10.2.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
10.3.   I would like to thank all the delegations that engaged with the United States and the other 
co-sponsors in July and also in our interactions since then. Even in the relatively brief period since 
the last General Council meeting, there is considerable progress to report on the Proposal to Enhance 
Transparency and Improve Compliance with Notification Obligations Under WTO Agreements 
(document JOB GC/204/Rev.7 – JOB/CTG/14/Rev.7). Notably, we are pleased to welcome five new 
co-sponsors, Iceland, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Paraguay and the Philippines who have joined in 
recent weeks, bringing the total n umber of co -sponsors to 19, plus the EU and all its Member States. 
The co -sponsors have continued to consult with Members to understand the resource, time and 
capacity challenges that prevent them from making good faith attempts to meet their notification 
obligations.  
10.4.   We have heard Members ' concerns that internal coordination challenges and high rates of 
turnover across Ministries make it very difficult to submit notifications on time. The co -sponsors hear 
your concerns, as we face these same challenges our selves. So, the title of the proposal has been 
changed to more accurately reflect a core aim of this effort, which is to improve Members ' ability to 
comply with their notification obligations by simplifying and reducing burdensome requirements. 
"Strengthen " in the title has been replaced by "improve " to emphasize that the proposal will not 
expand Member 's notification obligations or increase notification requirements in any way.  
10.5.   Paragraph 3 sets out a number of possible improvements that can make a difference, but the 
real work will take place in Committees and Groups where Members may express their views and 
share first -hand experiences. We strongly encourage any Member interested in improvi ng 
transparency to be part of the Working Group on Notification Obligations and Procedures. A 
significant change made in Rev.7 is the deletion of the language in the previous paragraph 5 which 
gave instructions to the Committee on Agriculture regarding a s pecific set of agriculture -related 
notifications. We heard Members ' concerns about the importance of equal treatment for all 
notifications, and the value in allowing conversations to play out in individual Committees, and we 
responded to those concerns. An d while we recognize that some have expressed interest in making 
the notification proposal more comprehensive, we consider work by CTG groups as a good starting 
point.  
10.6.   This proposal is an opportunity to bring greater transparency to one part of the system . It is 
something tangible we can do right now to make a difference. If we can succeed with improvements 
here, we can tackle transparency -related challenges more broadly. It is true that administrative 
measures remain, but the incentives provided allow for  any Member to seek assistance and support 
– regardless of the specific circumstances – and thereby meet its commitments. This should limit 
the need to apply administrative measures except in extreme situations. Of course, LDCs remain 
completely exempt fro m administrative measures provided that they request support and keep the 
relevant Committees informed of their needs.  
10.7.   We have also heard the concern that Members ' rights of participation in the WTO are being 
taken away, but we want to be clear: no Member  is blocked from engagement and/or participation 
in any WTO body. Nevertheless, there should be some consequences when Members are unwilling 
to meet their basic membership commitments. We feel that this proposal will in fact strengthen all WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 91 - 
 
  Members ' voices in the multilateral trading system – developing countries ' voices in particular – by 
empowering them to play a more active role in the functioning of the WTO and reinvigorating a 
sense of ownership.  
10.8.   This proposal has evolved considerably since it was firs t introduced several years ago. It 
represents a sincere effort by the co -sponsors to tackle WTO reform at a practical level with tangible 
benefits for all WTO Members. It would bring transformative change to the organization, strengthen 
the WTO 's negotiati ng arm, and enable the WTO to make progress in negotiating new rules. We 
welcome Members ' support for the proposal at this critical juncture.  
10.9.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
10.10.   We welcome this proposal being brought  to the General Council again. While we 're rightly 
dedicating much time in the lead up to MC12 on critical policy issues like fisheries subsidies, trade 
and health and agriculture, we would be remiss to overlook this opportunity to make a less noticed 
but highly significant contribution at the Conference to improving the way our system works. These 
are a set of changes that would not only improve the way that we monitor each other 's adherence 
to the principles we have commonly agreed, but also make it easie r to update those rules in future, 
improving our common understanding of the landscape of global trade. This is, in other words, an 
idea whose time has come. With that in mind I am delighted to welcome the new co -sponsors, as 
named by our colleague from th e US. I hope Members can recognise the way co -sponsors have 
listened to and responded to feedback received during outreach on this proposal and can see that 
significant shifts have been made in recent versions of the proposal. We encourage Members to 
review the latest text and co -sponsors remain open to further discussions on this as we move toward 
MC12.  
10.11.   The representative of Iceland  delivered the following statement:  
10.12.   Iceland fully supports the statement made by the US and is happy to be added to the list of 
co-sponsors to this proposal.  Transparency o f trade policies, trade measures and trade statistics is 
a fundamental principle underpinning a rules -based multilateral trading system.  Such information 
sharing by Member states creates predictability for cross -border traders and ensures an effective 
implementation of existing trade agreements.  Additionally , transparency works to better inform 
ongoing negotiations to further enhance rules and disciplines governing international trade.  
10.13.   At the same time and speaking on behalf of a small administration - we do understand the 
burden that transparency obligations can have on many Member states.  The introduction of 
necessary flexibilities for Members encountering temporary difficulties in fulfilling their notification 
obligations was therefore an important factor  behind Iceland' s decision to join this proposal , as was 
the elimination of financial penalties.  
10.14.   In that regard, I would like to express my appreciation to the proponents of this work for 
conducting an open and inclusive process which has led to this impr oved and revised version of the 
proposal.  Iceland encourages all Members that have not yet done so to support this important 
proposal and consider joining as co -sponsors.  
10.15.   The representative of the Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
10.16.   We thank the United States, the UK and other co -sponsors for their statement on this agenda 
item. We have witnessed the constructive evolution of the proposal on enhancing transparency and 
improving compliance with notification obligations – from the very fir st version almost three years 
ago, to how it stands today. The positive systemic objective which the proposal fosters is clear to 
us. The Philippines is therefore pleased to join other co -sponsors in joining this initiative as revised 
and as contained in J OB/GC/204/Rev .7 (14 Sep 2021).  
10.17.   The administrative aspect of the proposal has already greatly evolved. The Philippines 
considers that there now is balance between, one, the objectives of enhancing transparency and 
improving notification compliance; two, the  need to take into full account real practical difficulties of 
developing countries and LDCs; and, three, the need to address any wilful refusal to meet basic WTO 
commitments. We welcome other Members to engage with the co -sponsors to gain a better 
appreci ation of the proposal.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 92 - 
 
  10.18.   The representative of Turkey  delivered the following statement:  
10.19.   Turkey firmly believes that transparency is the key to a functioning multilateral trading 
system and the work of the WTO to ensure that is critical.  That is why we are closely following the 
effort on the side of the co -sponsors of this proposed decision.  We welcome the recent amendment 
on the title of the proposed decision. It clarifies that the ultimate aim of the proposal is to improve 
compliance with notification requirements and not bringing in new ones.  
10.20.   As we stated earlier, to achieve that aim, what we need is simplification of certain notification 
formats, longer time -frames, technical assistance and close guidance to assist Members.  
Acknowledging the capacity constraints developing and least developed countries have, we believe 
administrative measures for non -compliance, would only further alienate these countries from the 
multilateral system.  If we want to urge Members to comply, there are already possibilitie s and 
mechanisms to do that in relevant bodies. This kind of result oriented and pragmatic approaches 
can be more appropriate for the enhancement of transparency. And as a result, it can increase 
compliance with notifications. We are ready to work with int erested Members for such proposals.  
10.21.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
10.22.   We thank the United States for the updates of the proposal and the detailed explanations to 
respond to any possible concern. It is encouraging to h ave another five new co -sponsors (Iceland, 
Republic of Korea, Mexico, Paraguay and the Philippines) joining the proposal since the last General 
Council meeting. We also welcome the latest revision in JOB/GC/204/Rev .7 that helps bring more 
comfort and clari ty on some concerns.  
10.23.   Members always value transparency. However, it is also the fact that the level of notification 
compliance is yet to be improved. It is our joint responsibility to look into the root cause and this is 
what this proposal all about.  The proposal genuinely addresses the challenges and bottlenecks that 
hinder Members ' compliance with notification s. We, therefore, encourage all Members to attach 
greater attention on the positive effect that could be generated by this proposal to improve the 
fundamental function of the WTO and look forward to working together in making the proposal going 
forward.  
10.24.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
10.25.   My delegation thanks the delegation of the United States for introducing this a genda item 
which, after long discussions with the original proponents, we co -sponsor today. This was made 
possible by a willingness, demonstrated by the proponents of the initiative, to find alternatives and 
reach consensus. The deletion of paragraph 5 fro m the previous text, which called for a differentiated 
treatment of agricultural notifications, has played a decisive role.  
10.26.   Notifying our policies and complying with WTO rules are of the utmost importance. Therefore, 
it is of great value to maintain admini strative measures that currently encourage Members not only 
to comply with obligations but also to seek technical assistance to overcome the difficulties inherent 
to the compliance with these obligations.  We all experience difficulties with notifications, but we can 
also reap great benefits from improvements in the capacity to notify and the resulting increase in 
the number of notifications received. We recall that for small delegations from developing countries, 
the WTO's monitoring and transparency functi on is fundamental for gathering information, especially 
because of our limited global network of diplomatic missions and representations.  
10.27.   The proposal has evolved, as demonstrated by our support for it. We encourage all interested 
Members to contact the pr oponents to find ways to address their concerns, which would allow us to 
arrive at a consensus, with a view to improving the monitoring, transparency and functioning of this 
Organization.  
10.28.   The representative of Brunei Darussalam  delivered the following statement:  
10.29.   Brunei Darussalam agrees that transparency is an important element for the basic 
functioning of a rules -based organization such as the WTO, particularly for small economies, and 
developing and least developed countries, and so proposal s to improve transparency in such a 
multilateral setting should be encouraged and seen as a positive step.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 93 - 
 
  10.30.   While efforts to enhance transparency appears as though they should be easily acceptable 
by all, it should be remembered that there are those of us who face genuine, real and practical 
constraints. Whether in the form of human, technological/infrastructure or technical capacity, these 
constraints give rise to many challenges which have been further exacerbated by the crises the 
global pandemic has giv en rise to. Therefore , we see the suggested steps that the Working Group 
should take to facilitate compliance as being in the right direction, as highlighting areas where a 
Member is lacking, particularly in notifications, should be aimed at helping to ide ntify and address a 
Member 's gaps. Onerous punitive measures merely perpetuate the cycle of difficulties developing 
and least developed country Members face, when facilitative action is what is rather needed.  
10.31.   We thus support suggestions that other Members  have previously made, and share some of 
our own views on what would be beneficial such as: simplified notification procedures, for existing 
or future obligations; compliance awareness raising, to highlight the lack of compliance or 
notification by the WTO  Member who oftentimes may not even be aware of such a lack; technical 
assistance and guidance on the action needed to be undertaken by the WTO Member to be in 
conformity; and  longer time frames sufficient to operationalize such needed action. We encourage  
the proponents to bear these in mind as they continue to undertake consultations on this proposal.  
10.32.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
10.33.   We would like to thank the cosponsors of the revised document in JOB/GC/204/Rev.7 and  
the further explanation of changes made to the original proposal as put forward by the U nited States. 
We align ourselves to the Statement by the Africa Group and the ACP  Group . South Africa views 
Transparency as one of the important pillars of the multilateral trading system. The Paper titled "An 
Inclusive Approach to Transparency and Notification Requirements in the WTO" is our departure 
point to the core issues raised therein.  
10.34.   We acknowledge the attempt made to address our concerns , but remain concerned with the 
proposed administrative measures that aim to penalize Members that are unable to comply with 
their obligations.  We believe that this represents a disproportionate respo nse to the inability of many 
developing countries to fulfil their notification obligations due to capacity constraints, especially when 
the inability of many developing countries to comply is not wilful neglect of obligations, but is 
primarily due to serio us capacity constraints at Member States level.  
10.35.   We are concerned at the attempts to introduce changes to notification obligations under the 
Agreements and Understandings listed in paragraph 1 of the proposal , without following the 
amendment processes presc ribed under the Marrakesh Agreement, thus severely affecting the rights 
and obligations of Members. Similarly , on the intention to use Members ' TPR reports as a basis for 
the enforcement of specific obligations or the imposition of new policy commitments o n Members , 
the TPRM was never intended to serve as a basis for the enforcement of specific obligations under 
the Agreements or to impose new policy commitments on Members.   
10.36.   While this revised paper has addressed the financial penalties, it still includes  notification 
requirements on final bound rate AMS commitments for developed Members to 2 years.  We look 
forward to engaging with the proponents to further engage on the issues entailed therein.  
10.37.   The representative of China delivered the following statement:  
10.38.   We take note that the proposal has been further revised, we thank some of the proponents 
for engaging with us bilaterally on this proposal. As we indicated in previous G eneral Council  
meetings, we share the views with proponents on the importanc e of transparency for proper 
functioning of multilateral trading system and the need to improve the compliance with notification 
obligations. However, China believes that the general approach to achieve the above -mentioned 
objectives is to provide incentiv es to support Members' efforts to meet their notification obligations 
rather than taking a punitive approach depriving Members legitimate rights as WTO Members. We 
also see the problems in encouraging Members to bring to relevant Committees any notificatio ns 
that other Member considers have not been made. In our view, this will add further burden to 
Members and may not be conducive to helping Members improve compliance regarding transparency 
and notifications. We look forward to continuing discussions with the proponents on this proposal.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 94 - 
 
  10.39.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
10.40.   Japan would like to reiterate that this proposal is to improve compliance with Members ' 
existing obligations, and is not proposing the introduction of any addit ional burden on Members. 
Before the administrative measures kick in, there are multiple layers of safeguards in place.  This 
proposal is calling for discussions among Members to improve the notification system . To find 
common ground on this issue by MC12, t he co -sponsors will continue to reach out to the Members 
to explain the proposal.  
10.41.   The representative of Mexico  delivered  the following statement:  
10.42.   We would like to thank the United States for the updates and the presentation of the new 
version of the document. The changes that have been made underscore the aim of the document 
and reduce the administrative measures. We are very happy to see the change s that have been 
made when it comes to the distinction between different kinds of notifications. We think this is a 
useful document for us to revise all notification processes , without prejudice to any possible 
questions. The evolution of the document can be seen . The reason why  Mexico has joined as a co -
sponsor of the document is that we believe it is very important to improve compliance with 
notification requirements within the WTO , and we think this could be a good foundation for further 
discussion in th e future.   
10.43.   The representative of Israel  delivered the following statement:  
10.44.   I want to thank all the co -sponsors, in particular the new co -sponsors of this proposal. The 
momentum we've had during the last few months shows that we have tackled the concerns ra ised 
previously seriously, and we aim to agree on this as a potential deliverable for MC12. All Members 
agree that transparency is of critical importance to the system's overall functioning. Therefore, I 
urge all Members consider supporting it. Israel stan ds ready to continue our close collaboration with 
the co -sponsors and those interested in joining as co -sponsors.  
10.45.   The representative of Mauritius, on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
10.46.   I would like to highlight what the African Group has always been supportive of the principle 
of transparency and understands the importance of this practice for the Organization. However, we 
do not believe that enforcing punitive measures or imposing finan cial penalties against Members to 
meet certain notification obligations are the best approaches in addressing the problem of 
notification in this Organization. While technical assistance in the field of notification s is welcome , it 
does not address all the  issues that developing countries face. We are ready to engage constructively 
in discussions to improve the transparency rules of the WTO, but transparency rules must not be 
unnecessarily burdensome and onerous , especially in light of limited institutional  capacity of 
developing and least developing countries. The African Group is also concerned with the proposal on 
counternotifications which will not necessarily assist in strengthening the multilateral trading system.  
10.47.   The representative of Jamaica, on beha lf of the ACP Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
10.48.   The ACP Group thanks the United States for the statement and the cosponsors for their 
submission. The Group reaffirms its previous statements on the issue which has been on the G eneral 
Council's  agend a for some time now. We will again stress the importance of transparency to the 
optimal functioning of the WTO, Members' adherence to their transparency obligations is critical for 
our businesses' participation in global trade and in our discussions at the  WTO. We fully support 
adherence to obligations as it is the nature of a well -functioning rules -based multilateral trading 
system. At the same time, we must be cognizant of the severe capacity constraints of developing 
countries and LDCs even made worse by  the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic.  
10.49.   We are in sympathy with elements of the proposal which look at capacity constraints and 
options to dealing with them. We also welcome the removal of financial measures. We think those 
ideas are good ideas and can assi st in finding a way forward. A way forward is in the interest of all 
Members. We believe that to solve the problem we have to address the root causes . For the ACP 
Group Members , with our outstanding notifications , our root cause is not wilful neglect nor WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 95 - 
 
  negligence, it has never been that. The root cause of the problem for our Members is capacity 
constraints, the proposal especially the inclusion of administrative measures , is therefore sending 
an unfortunate message that Members should be sanctioned for th eir limited capacity. This is not 
the approach required to address this very important issue. We cannot and will never accept a 
punitive approach to resolving what is essentially a capacity constraint issue. It must be addressed 
in a way that incentivizes dialogue, cooperation, technical assistance and capacity building. It is for 
this reason that the ACP Group cannot accept this proposal. We stand ready however to engage 
constructively in respect to finding a durable solution to this issue of adherence to notification 
obligations. The ACP Group and some cosponsors of the proposal had a very encouraging meeting 
last week and we remain committed to working with all Members to find a common ground.  
10.50.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
10.51.   Korea appreciates the United States and other proponents ' intervention and expresses our 
support on this proposal, as a co -sponsor. My delegation finds the revised version of the proposal in 
a right balance by broadening supports to al l Members, including LDCs, and removing the proposed 
financial measure. This proposal helps Members fulfil our obligation of notification under the WTO 
Agreement s, by providing the capacity -building, which will contribute to enhancing transparency in 
the end. With the latest revision of its title to "improve compliance with notification requirements " 
from "strengthen notification requirements ", it becomes clearer that the proposal focuses on 
improving Members ' ability to notify . Korea would like to ask Memb ers to engage in the discussions 
on the proposal for further developments and support the proposal.  
10.52.   The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
10.53.   Canada remains convinced to the long -term benefits that this proposal will bring to our 
Organization. Much of our discussion over the past year and a half has been about the importance 
of improved transparency and how it can help us all respond to crisis situations. This proposal offers 
us an opportunity to examine how to support those improvements, to find new tools to support each 
Member's effort to comply with the notification obligations and to encourage the provision of the 
assistance we all kn ow produces positive results. It is time to seize this opportunity and star this 
work.  
10.54.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
10.55.   Pakistan thanks the co -sponsors for the revised document including its title and 
accompanying explanati ons and the process. We echo our past statements under this item. We 
believe that transparency is a fundamental pillar of the WTO, which brings predictability to trade. 
However, we are not sure that the proposal will have the desired impact of improving tr ansparency 
with regard to notifications. We are not sure that non-compliance  is always wilful or has quick fixes, 
like via technical assistance.  
10.56.   Pakistan re -emphasises that with regard to notifications, administrative and punitive 
measures would not lead to any optimal resolution. Such measures risk being counter -productive.  
Instead, we call for simplifying procedures, and seek an approach that makes the obligations easier 
and less complicated. Therefore, we are happy to engage with cosponsors in taking th e discussion 
on this forward.  At the same time, Pakistan would like to highlight that transparency is not confined 
to notification obligations. Transparency in the conduct of business and procedures, regular work of 
councils and committees, negotiations, a pproaches adopted for negotiations and in members ' 
agreements with other Members, all must be transparent. In times such as these where global 
emergencies require urgent collective action, transparency in matters of global interest such as 
vaccine producti on and manufacturing licenses and technology sharing must also be transparent. 
Pakistan can work with members to address transparency in its true spirit and for the betterment of 
the membership  
10.57.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
10.58.   India thanks  the co -sponsors of the present proposal on transparency . After listening to the 
submissions and deliberations today , we get this feeling that transparency is solely viewed as 
fulfilling notification obligations of developing countri es, including LDCs , whereas, transparency is 
infused across the functions of the WTO, from the conduct of its day-to-day functioning, and how WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 96 - 
 
  these functions are communicated to the outside world. We get a feeling that insufficient information 
is only the concern of developed Members.  
10.59.   Let me clarify here that insufficient information is not only the concern of developed 
Members, developing countries also have concerns about some Members ' notifications, and let me 
point out for the benefit of the M embership  here, that whatever these concerns, when we had 
presented this about two years back, it was not taken up too seriously. I'm quoting from document 
JOB/GC/218, which was co - sponsored by the Africa Group, India and Cuba.  
10.60.   The first one is on improving agric ultural notifications. The final bound AMS commitments, 
which were supposed to be provided within 120 days of the end of the year by some of the members 
have not been provided for more than two years. The second one is regarding GATS Article 3.3. The 
importance of services notifications is as good as the importance of goods notifications. Here we see 
that some developed countries are low in their level of compliance with existing notification 
requirements, under GATS Article 3.3 , and we would request and en courage developed countries to 
comply with their notification obligations under GATS Article 3.3. The third one is on GATS Mode 4 
related issues which have undermined existing mode for market access commitments. Various 
proposals have been submitted by dev eloping countries to enhance Mode 4 GATS transparency , to 
allow for effective realization of the market access, which has already been provided for. We 
therefore encourage developed Members to regularly notify existing and new measures, which 
significantly affect their Mode 4 commitments. This is all the more  required, in view of the present 
measures undertaken by various countries during the pandemic.   
10.61.   The fourth one is on Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. Developed countries have a 
positive legal obligation to provide incentives to enterprises and institu tions in their territories to 
promote an enhance technology transfer to least developed countries. TRIPS Council has put in place 
a monitoring mechanism. However, this mechanism does not evaluate whether developed countries 
are compliant with their notific ation obligation under Article 66.2. Therefore , more transparency in 
this area would be supportive of least developed countries, efforts to build a viable technological 
base. The fifth one is on disclosure of reason of genetic resources and associate that traditional 
knowledge in patent applications. Here my request is that it would be useful to require WTO Members 
to make annual notifications on the number of patent applications based on traditional knowledge.  
And last is transparency in tariffs. Most non ad valorem charges are being implemented by developed 
Members at the WTO. Non ad valorem tariffs are non -transparent, create uncertainty and block 
market access. At the least, they are ad valorem equivalence should be notified every year, or for 
even more transparency, non -ad valorem tariffs should be converted to ad valorem duties.  
10.62.   In view of this, it is hard to agree to any proposal which is providing for administrative 
actions, and penalties, in case of delayed submissions of notifications and assumes wilful default on 
part of Members rather than taking cognizance of the capacity constraints and other legitimate 
difficulties faced by a large number of developing countries. We've denied that underlying principle. 
Therefore, another way of addressing this issue is to encourage Members who update their 
notifications, despite constraints , and to assist those who have not been able to do so, because of 
various reasons, including limited capacit y. We look forward to a comprehensive engagement on 
this issue.  
10.63.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
10.64.   My delegation thanks the co -sponsors for their submission through this 7th revision.  We 
have discussed this issue in the previous G eneral Council  and CTG meetings , and exchanged opinions 
during several informal talks with Members. Bangladesh reiterates that transparency is an essential 
pillar, however, only a few notification templates cannot assure transparency.  
10.65.   My delegation thanks the proponents particularly for  recognizing the difficulties of some 
Members and their capacity constraints to comply the notification requirements. We also welcome 
the provision of consultation with relevant Committees and other Working Groups and bodies to 
identify both systemic and s pecific improvements such as introducing simplified notification formats, 
updating reporting requirements, holding additional trainings and workshops at the committee level 
and using new digital tools that can help Members improve compliance with notificat ion obligations. 
My delegation earlier has stressed that notification provisions under different Agreements are of 
diverse nature , and the capability of the LDCs to notify is severely constrained by a lack of technical WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 97 - 
 
  capacity and unique internal coordina tion challenges. The same is the case for the list of Agreements 
and Understandings that the co -sponsors mentioned under paragraph 1 of the draft Decision.  
According to the Marrakesh Agreement  Article XI.2, LDCs "will only be required to undertake 
commitme nts and concessions to the extent consistent with their individual development, financial 
and trade needs or their administrative and institutional capabilities ". Therefore, LDCs are not to be 
forced to act beyond their capacity and limitation.  This proposal should also take into ac count the 
regular challenges that many LDCs face in complying notification obligation that require severe 
internal -administrative coordination in LDCs.  My delegation believes, without practically addressing 
the capacit y gaps and domestic coordination challenges of those Members, only administrative 
measures at the WTO will not do justice. On this issue, the delegation of Bangladesh looks forward 
to working with the Members.  
10.66.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
10.67.   We thank the proponents for the latest revision of the proposal and we thank the US 
delegation for the explanation. At the outset, Indonesia underlines the importance of transparency 
as one of the pillars of the multilateral trading sy stem and transparency provides Members with 
equal access to information on prevailing laws, regulation measures and policies that effectively 
regulate our practice of international trade. Though we welcome the latest revision to the proposal, 
Indonesia is still of the view that punitive administrative measures would likely discourage 
participation of Members from developing countries and LDCs from the multilateral trading system.   
10.68.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
10.69.   We would l ike to express our appreciation to the U nited States for raising this agenda  item. 
We also welcome the new co -sponsors, which reflects the importance that Members continue to 
attach to notifications and transparency in the WTO. The latest amendments continue to 
demonstrate the proponents ' openness to improve the proposal in order to progress towards 
consensus. I would like to emphasise one point here. That is to encourage Members to avoid framing 
transparency and notification as a 'develope d vs developing Members ' issue. It is not. Rather, 
transparency and notification are an important systemic issue that can help to buttress the role of 
the WTO as the  cornerstone of the rules -based multilateral trading system. The complete and timely 
submis sion of notifications is key to ensure effectiveness of the WTO 's monitoring function. More 
importantly, it promotes confidence amongst Members. Full transparency of Members ' trade policies 
and implementation of WTO obligations helps mitigate trade frictio ns and allow better -informed 
negotiations.  
10.70.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
10.71.   I would like to thank all the delegations that engaged with the United States and the other 
cosponsors in July and also in our interaction s since then. Even in the relatively brief period since 
the last General Council meeting, there is considerable progress to report on the Proposal to Enhance 
Transparency and Improve Compliance with Notification Obligations Under WTO Agreements 
(documents JOB GC/204/Rev.7 – JOB/CTG/14/Rev.7). Notably, we are pleased to welcome five new 
co-sponsors, Iceland, Mexico, Republic of Korea, Paraguay and the Philippines who have joined in 
recent weeks, bringing the total number of co -sponsors to 19, plus the E urope an Union and all its 
member States.  
10.72.   The co -sponsors have continued to consult with Members to understand the resource, time 
and capacity challenges that prevent them from making good faith attempts to meet their notification 
obligations. We have heard Mem bers' concerns that internal coordination challenges and high rates 
of turnover across ministries make it very difficult to submit notifications on time. The co -sponsors 
hear your concerns, as we face these same challenges ourselves. So, the title of the p roposal has 
been changed to more accurately reflect a core aim of this effort, which is to improve Members ' 
ability to comply with their notification obligations by simplifying and reducing burdensome 
requirements. "Strengthen " in the title has been replaced by improve to emphasize that the proposal 
will not expand Member 's notification obligations or increase notification requirements in any way.  
10.73.   Paragraph three sets out a number of possible improvements that can make a difference, 
but the real work will take place in committees and groups where Members may express their views WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 98 - 
 
  and share first -hand experiences.  We strongly encourage any Member interested in improving 
transparency to be part of the Working Group on Notification Obligations and Procedures.  
10.74.    A significant change made in Rev. 7 is the deletion of the language in the previous 
paragraph  5 which gave i nstructions to the Committee on Agriculture regarding a specific set of 
agriculture -related notifications. We heard Members ' concerns about the importance of equal 
treatment for all notifications, and the value in allowing conversations to play out in indi vidual 
committees, and we responded to those concerns. And while we recognize that some have expressed 
interest in making the notification proposal more comprehensive, we consider work by CTG groups 
as a good starting point. This proposal is an opportunity  to bring greater transparency to one part 
of the system. It is something tangible we can do right now to make a difference. If we can succeed 
with improvements here, we can tackle transparency -related challenges more broadly. It is true that 
administrativ e measures remain, but the incentives provided allow for any Member to seek 
assistance and support – regardless of the specific circumstances – and thereby meet its 
commitments. This should limit the need to apply administrative measures except in extreme 
situations. And of course, LDCs remain completely exempt from administrative measures provided 
that they request support and keep the relevant committees informed of their needs.  
10.75.   We have also heard the concern that Members ' rights of participation in the WTO are being 
taken away, but we want to be clear: no Member is blocked from engagement and/or participation 
in any WTO body. Nevertheless, there should be some consequences when Members are unwilling 
to meet their basic membership commitments. We feel tha t this proposal will in fact strengthen all 
Members ' voices in the multilateral trading system – developing countries ' voices in particular – by 
empowering them to play a more active role in the functioning of the WTO and reinvigorating a 
sense of ownershi p.  
10.76.   This proposal has evolved considerably since it was first introduced several years ago. It 
represents a sincere effort by the co -sponsors to tackle WTO reform at a practical level with tangible 
benefits for all WTO Members. It would bring transformativ e change to the organization, strengthen 
the WTO 's negotiating arm, and enable the WTO to make progress in negotiating new rules. We 
welcome Members ' support for the proposal at this critical juncture.  
10.77.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
11  PAPER TITLED "THE LEGAL STATUS OF 'JOINT STATEMENT INITIATIVES' AND THEIR 
NEGOTIATED OUTCOMES" BY INDIA, SOUTH AFRICA AND NAMIBIA 
(WT/GC/W/819/REV.1)  
11.1.   The Chair recalled  that this item had been included on the agenda at the request of the 
delegations of India and South Africa and related to the Paper on "Legal Status of Joint Statement 
Initiatives and their Negotiated Outcomes", together with the communication in document  
WT/GC/W/819. This item had been first introduced during the General Council meeting in March and 
had also been taken up in May and July.   
11.2.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
11.3.   The Tokyo Round Plurilateral Codes created a fragmente d system of rules. While in respect of 
some contracting parties, the GATT rules were applicable in respect of others rules of Plurilateral 
Codes were applicable. This created considerable complexity in determining what obligations were 
applicable in respec t of which Contracting Party. Recognizing problems created by the fragmented 
system of trade rules, WTO Members sought an end to this problem. This has been clearly articulated 
in the following recitals of the Preamble to the Marrakesh Agreement : "Resolved , therefore, to 
develop an integrated, more viable and durable multilateral trading system …. " And " Determined to 
preserve the basic principles and to further the objectives underlying this multilateral trading 
system. "  
11.4.   These recitals in the Preamble to t he Marrakesh Agreement clearly highlight the concerns of 
WTO Members arising from the fragmentation of the multilateral rules on account of Tokyo Round 
plurilateral codes. On this issue, the Appellate Body in one of the earliest disputes under the WTO, 
Brazil – Desiccated Coconut, had also observed "The authors of the new WTO regime intended to 
put an end to the fragmentation (emphasis added) that had characterized the previous system. This WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 99 - 
 
  can be seen from the preamble to the WTO Agreement which states, in  pertinent part: Resolved, 
therefore, to develop an integrated, more viable and durable multilateral trading system 
encompassing the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, the results of past trade liberalization 
efforts, and all of the results of the Uru guay Round of Multilateral Trade Negotiations."  Going back 
to plurilateral agreements would, therefore, be a step in the wrong direction and would be contrary 
to the determination and resolve as enshrined in the Preamble of the Marrakesh Agreement.  
11.5.   As co-sponsor to this paper, we would like to reiterate again that we are not questioning the 
right of Members to meet and discuss any issue. What we are saying is that when such discussions 
turn into negotiations and their outcomes are to be brought into the WT O rule book, the fundamental 
rules of the WTO must be followed. Any attempt to introduce new rules resulting from JSI 
negotiations into the WTO without fulfilling the requirements of Articles IX and X of the Marrakesh 
Agreement , will create a precedent for  any group of Members to bring any issue into the WTO without 
the required consensus; bypass the collective oversight of Members for bringing in any new rules or 
amendments to existing rules; usurp limited WTO resources available for multilateral negotiati ons. 
Most importantly, such an approach will undermine balance in agenda setting and result in Members 
disregarding existing multilateral mandates arrived at through consensus in favour of issues without 
multilateral mandates, leading to marginalization or  exclusion of issues which are difficult but critical 
to Membership at large, such as agriculture.  
11.6.   In sum, our paper only states that basic fundamental principles and rules, of rule based 
multilateral trading system, as enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement, should be followed by all 
Members, including the participants of various JSIs. In fact, our paper also lists out options available 
to JSI proponents for bringing in their negotiated outcomes in the WTO.   
11.7.   The representative of Sri Lanka  delivered  the following statement:  
11.8.   We recall our previous statements made in this regard. Sri Lanka appreciates the proponents 
for bringing the pertinent legal issues to our considered attention. I wish to highlight four key points:  
11.9.   First, JSIs do introduce new sy stemic and developmental challenges that the Membership 
must reflect on the implications for decision -making in the WTO and what the impact is on the core 
principles of the WTO. They pose a serious challenge to the consensus -based decision -making 
principle  of the multilateral system, prompting many developing country participants to become a 
part of the strategy to bypass consensus and WTO rules.  
11.10.   Second, we do not question the right for any group of Members to discuss any issue 
informally, but where such d iscussions turn into negotiations, and their outcomes are sought to be 
formalized into the WTO framework, this can only be done in accordance with the rules set out in 
the Marrakesh Agreement.  
11.11.   Third, we all know that introducing new issues, such as invest ment, would require decision 
of the Ministerial Conference. Where  do we have such Ministerial Decisions to commence 
negotiations? We continue to bear the view that there is no legal basis on which negotiations on 
investment can occur within the WTO. Articl e III.2 of the Marrakesh Agreement says both the 
negotiations and the implementation are decided by the WTO Ministerial Conference, which operates 
by consensus. Not only is there no mandate to negotiate on investment in the WTO, such 
negotiations are expli citly precluded.  
11.12.   Finally, it must not be assumed that developing countries that participate in the JSI on the 
promise of benefits to them have endorsed the adoption of an outcome through mechanisms that 
violate the WTO 's rules.  
11.13.   The representative of Austra lia delivered the following statement:  
11.14.   Plurilateral negotiations have a long history in this house.  They have in fact been the 
predominant form of rule -making in this institution.  There are many paths to multilateral 
agreements.  Indeed, no multilateral agreement ever started with universal participation at the 
outset.  WTO-consistent plurilateral trade agreements, with broad participation, play an important 
role in complementing multilateral initiatives. Australia is one of over 110 Members p articipating in 
one or more of the Joint Statement Initiatives.  These initiatives complement multilateral initiatives WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 100 - 
 
  and provide a pathway to multilateralism, particularly where they are – and indeed they are – 
inclusive, open and transparent.  
11.15.   While we th ank South Africa and India for their paper, we do not agree with the legal 
arguments in it.  In particular, consensus is not required in order for Members to either launch these 
plurilateral initiatives.  Consensus is also not required for a group of Members  collectively to improve 
their schedules.   
11.16.   The current JSIs have the potential to deliver vital outcomes that strengthen the WTO 's rule -
making function at a time when we are all seeking to revitalise the WTO 's rule -making function.  We 
should indeed all be proud of the fact that the domestic regulation initiative in services is coming 
together, and is going to contribute to the success of MC12.   
11.17.   Australia therefore encourages all Members to participate in these plurilateral initiatives – 
and if they do not w ish to join – to at least keep an open mind on them.  This will help us to deliver 
outcomes that can modernise and enhance the WTO rulebook for the benefit of the entire 
Membership.  
11.18.   The representative of Nepal  delivered the following statement:  
11.19.   Nepal is fully committed to safeguarding multilateralism and facilitating rules -based, 
predictable, transparent, and inclusive trade with a view to achieving broad objectives of the 
Marrakesh Agreement.  Consensus -based decision -making and consultation, discussion, and 
dialogues to achieve the WTO objectives seems crucial.  Nepal is in favour of the paper and supports 
its essence, as it is consistent with the promotion and protection of provision and spirit of the 
Marrakesh Agreement.   
11.20.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
11.21.   Bangladesh is a strong supporter of multilateralism which should remain as the main 
principle of the WTO. My capital is still examining this communication that demands deeper 
discussion involving all WTO Members. Banglad esh looks forward to engaging  constructively with 
the proponents.   
11.22.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
11.23.   Japan believes the JSIs will contribute to updating the WTO rulebooks and to ensuring the 
relevance of the WTO in the world to day. Without the JSIs, the WTO risks becoming less relevant 
and even losing its raison d 'être as a cornerstone of the multilateral trading system (MTS).  We 
should recall that a number of achievements made in the GATT or the WTO were initially taken up 
or discussed in the plurilateral initiatives and they are later merged in this system. We believe the 
JSIs are legitimate and consistent with the WTO.  
11.24.   The JSI meetings are organized in an open, transparent and inclusive manner. While we 
need to take account of the convenience of respective Members including the size of the delegations 
to organize the process, the fact that many WTO Members are participat ing in the JSIs (in fact, the 
number of participating Members is increasing) and that actively engaging in negotiations in a 
creative and innovative way clearly shows its importance and relevance.  
11.25.   We have high hopes that, with more Members ' participation,  JSIs will achieve concrete 
outcomes at the time of MC12 and beyond. Japan will continue to work with other Members to deliver 
substantial outcomes in the JSIs.  
11.26.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
11.27.   Like many others , Korea is a strong believer in the legitimacy and usefulness of JSIs in the 
legal framework of the WTO.  Under the current circumstances in the WTO, these initiatives, which 
are open to all Members, represent the most viable, practical path for updating th e WTO rulebook 
in order for the WTO to remain relevant to the priorities of today.   WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 101 - 
 
  11.28.   At the same time, we are of the view that the status quo for integrating plurilaterals is 
inadequate if we are to make the WTO even more relevant to new and emerging challe nges. There 
needs to be efforts to look at ways to expand the legal options by which the integration of 
plurilaterals may be achieved.  We note that India and South Africa 's submission suggests potential 
amendments in the WTO 's legal structure as a possible option.  We thank those delegations, both JSI 
proponents and non -participants alike, that have helped to advance a constructive discussion on this 
issue.  
11.29.   The procedures for incorporating plurilaterally negotiated outcomes are predicated, to 
varying  degrees depending on the areas concerned, on cooperation with non -JSI Members.  It is our 
hope that participation in the JSIs would be as broad and inclusive as possible.  It is also our hope 
that all Members will be supportive of integrating into the WTO r ulebook the outcomes being 
negotiated in earnest by more than three quarters of its Membership, including small vulnerable 
economies and LDCs.  
11.30.   Lastly, we welcome and support discussions in the JSIs to enhance understanding of the 
legal architecture.  Just t his week, the Investment Facilitation JSI had its second in -depth discussion 
on this topic.  Korea will continue to engage and contribute our thoughts to ongoing and future 
discussions on ways to expand legal options for integrating plurilaterals into the W TO.  
11.31.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
11.32.   We attach high importance to the WTO being able to respond to the rapid changing 
international economic environment and global trade, especially in a digitalized world during the 
pandemic.  We sincerely believe that the voluntary, open, transparent and inclusive nature of 
plurilateral approach of JSIs is a practical approach to update the WTO rules and to make the WTO 
a living organization. It does not affect non -participating Membe rs' rights and obligations. Rather, 
non-participating Members can choose to join when they are willing and ready. In reality, these JSIs 
benefit all Members, including the non -participating Members.  
11.33.   The proponents mentioned that there is an option for the  JSI negotiated outcome being 
concluded outside the WTO. However, we are of the view that it would be very undesirable , to see 
the participants not being able to have the JSIs concluded within the WTO and have to go outside 
the framework of the WTO. This c ould actually undermine the WTO function s in addressing and 
responding to trade and related matters.  We urge Members to discuss a workable way forward for 
bringing the real benefit to all Members, taking into account the respective development stages and 
maintaining the existing rights and obligations of all Members.  
11.34.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
11.35.   The paper touches on an important topic and we hope to discuss this subject post -MC12 in 
more detail. If one looks at  history, multilateral outcomes were built on plurilaterals. We do not 
share the view that Joint Statement Initiatives (JSIs) would be antithetical to developing countries. 
The four JSIs under negotiation today include many developing countries and themes that are 
specifically geared to the needs of developing countries.  
11.36.   The risk is that if Members do not allow more flexibility to negotiate in this Organisation, 
negotiations will take place elsewhere. This amounts to an identity choice – and we prefer 
negotiations to take place here.  
11.37.   The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement:  
11.38.   This is a very important systemic issue. Initiatives by individual Members and groups of 
Members have been a natural part of the development of the multilateral rules -based trading system 
and there is nothing that impedes Members to work on negotiating new rules in the WTO. The Joint 
Statement Initiatives respond to Members' ambitions to address issues of relevance in the 21st 
century and we should not prevent Members from working on initiatives that intend to strengthen 
and develop the system. The current i nitiatives cover a variety of issues and the format of the 
negotiated outcomes will be diverse also in its legal architecture and cannot therefore be predefined 
or prejudged. In that way we trust that Members who participate in these Joint Initiatives will  find a 
way forward that respect the fundamental principles of this Organization. However, we are open to WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 102 - 
 
  have a broader discussion on how new rulemaking is integrated into the WTO , and I suggest that 
this could be an element of the WTO reform discussions post-MC12.  
11.39.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
11.40.   The United Kingdom has intervened on this proposal at previous General Councils, setting 
out our strong support for the Joint Initiatives , which have brought much neede d energy and 
dynamism to the WTO. While it is perfectly fine to have a conversation about the legal status of our 
work on different issues at the WTO, and as our colleague from the E uropean Union said, this is an 
important conversation, such a conversation  should not be divorced from the reality of the people 
we serve and why we are sent here to Geneva. Last week 's Public Forum was a timely reminder of 
the fact that business and civil society expects us to make progress on the issues that matter to 
them in the third decade of the 21st century. We should therefore be actively engaged in working 
out together how we can enable that and not in blocking progress on it. That should be the teller of 
discussion on our initiatives and is how the U nited Kingdom  will continue to engage in this area.  
11.41.   The representative of Chile delivered the following statement:  
11.42.   We definitely support Joint Initiatives. While we have asked that the proponents raise a topic 
that is important and must be discussed, the dialogue must be car ried forward with the purpose of 
seeking solutions and not of hindering the progress of Joint Initiatives. Last Thursday, we had the 
opportunity to hear positive reports by the coordinators of various joint initiatives, all of which are 
progressing steadil y. For one of them, the text of the agreement is stabilized. This is great news for 
the WTO and an example that we should all follow.  
11.43.   Thanks to this progress, the initiatives have reinvigorated the negotiating function of our 
Organization and mobilized ove r two thirds of Members, with participants from all regions and levels 
of development. We should not lose sight of this, nor of its value as a route to finding solutions to 
the economic challenges of the 21st century.  
11.44.   Joint Statement Initiatives (JSI), bei ng open, transparent and inclusive processes that 
respect the decision and rights of those Members that prefer not to join them, are absolutely 
legitimate. Seeking to deny the Members the right to continue along this path does not contribute 
to a healthy O rganization. The alternative we had, multilateral negotiations, while certainly 
preferred, did not work. This must be acknowledged.  
11.45.   The achievements accomplished and future agreements will benefit not only all the 
participants, but also those Members that have not yet joined, especially developing and least -
developed countries. Calling into question these initiatives would mean denying them this 
opportunity.  
11.46.   The representative of Colombia  delivered the following statement:  
11.47.   I would like to reiterate our support for and commitment to the discussions and negotiations 
that are taking place in the various Joint Statement Initiatives. Colombia is a developing country, 
and our position on the document under discussion is well known: while reiterating our commit ment 
to the multilateral system and the principle of consensus in this Organization, I would like to 
emphasize once again that we do not share the legal analysis presented in the text discussed under 
this agenda item. In this regard, and in the interests o f promoting an efficient meeting, I would like 
to refer Members to our statement delivered under this same agenda item during the General 
Council's sessions in March and July.  
11.48.   The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement:  
11.49.   I think that the COVID -19 pandemic and its aftermath has revealed that the world trade and 
global economy has changed quite a lot , and the WTO must remain able to discuss how to help 
restore the global economy at a better pace , not just in a normal manner because things have 
changed quite dramatically. Our delegation sees that participating in Joint Statement Initiative s is 
one effective approach and opportunity to modernize existing WTO rules to become better suited to 
the current trade practices and challenges.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 103 - 
 
  11.50.   In our view, JSI s do not attempt to undermine the importance of the multilateral trading 
system but rather it is a way to strengthen it by addressing new key issues that are affecting today's 
trade. We appreciate the progress made so far in the Services Do mestic Regulation and E -commerce 
negotiations, the JSIs that we are participating  in, and we hope that this will become one of the 
tangible deliverables at the MC12.  
11.51.   We encourage non -JSI participants to look at the plurilateral process in a constructive w ay, 
as we think this reinforces the WTO's ability to respond to the current trade and global challenges 
and let us avoid putting the WTO at risk of a paralysis in the absence of a proper reform for the 
future.  
11.52.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the f ollowing statement:  
11.53.   My delegation does see the point behind why some Members would want to go off on this 
route of JSI s as a matter of routine at this point in time , but they do so without addressing the core 
problems facing WTO today. Pakistan welcomes th e paper by India and S outh Africa on the legal 
status of JSIs. This paper has raised pertinent questions on an element which is of a fundamental 
nature for this organization. Notwithstanding their content , JSIs pose a challenge to the consensus -
based decision -making principle of the multi lateral system.  Consensus lies at the core of this 
multilateral institution. Compromising this principle is a strike at the very foundation of 
multilateralism.  
11.54.   We hear frequently that the present JSIs under discussion are open, transparent and 
inclusive. T his per se is no qualification, since every activity at the WTO is by definition supposed to 
be open, transparent and inclusive. Firstly, moving without consensus does not qualify as inclusivity. 
Second, negotiating agreements on subjects, others consider premature for negotiation, does not 
qualify as openness. Lastly, developing and smaller countries are often at a loss in terms of 
negotiating coalitions and defending their interests in a non -multilateral setting.  We, therefore, see 
the questions posed in this paper as pertinent and look forward to discussing this aspect, particularly 
with reference to upholding the fundamental pillars of this system.  
11.55.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
11.56.   Russia strongly believes t hat pluri - formats must be acknowledged as one of the legitimate 
means to improve WTO legal framework. We are in favour  of a flexible geometry approach in respect 
of the plurilateral agreements. It is not certainly the best option. However, since a truly m ultilateral 
approach in the new treaty -making process is still not feasible, we simply do not have other options 
to progress with the development of the new trade rules in the evolving areas that are still not 
covered by the WTO rulebook. At the same time the need for such universally recognized rules has 
been proven, especially in the context of the pandemic.  
11.57.   We are thus look forward to the MC12 outcomes that would reflect the progress achieved so 
far in respect of the JSIs.  This work, of course, should g o forward in parallel with the negotiations 
on traditional agenda. Russia believes that the Membership can and should proceed with both 
simultaneously . 
11.58.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
11.59.   Paraguay is a strong supporter of the multilateral trading system and we recognize that 
multilateral platforms are ideal for the progressive dismantling of barriers to trade of goods and 
services. Nevertheless, reaching multilateral agreements may not be an easy task for the Members, 
given the  current circumstances, and some of them may want to further discuss certain areas that 
they consider essential.  
11.60.   We understand that Joint Initiatives have opened a much -needed and pragmatic path to 
overcoming obstacles in WTO negotiations. Plurilateral ini tiatives have created a space where the 
multilateral trading system can be reinforced and adapted to the challenges of the 21st century.  
11.61.   While it is a small country, Paraguay participates in a number of initiatives – such as the 
initiatives on e -commerce, investment facilitation for development, MSMEs, services domestic 
regulation and trade and gender – as we believe that they can provide tangible benefits to all WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 104 - 
 
  Members, including those not part of the initiatives. The cross -cutting nature of the issues ad dressed 
in each Joint Initiative and the participation of two thirds of the Members to date reflect the existing 
interest in promoting discussions that may serve as a means to development, keeping the 
Organization relevant.  
11.62.   For this reason, Paraguay encour ages all of the Members to continue working on plurilateral 
initiatives in an open, inclusive and transparent manner, and on a voluntary basis. My delegation 
stands ready to discuss the best way of addressing the topic of the legal instruments that will be  
used to integrate joint initiatives into the WTO system of rules.  
11.63.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
11.64.   The United States believes that plurilateral negotiations at the WTO can be a useful means 
to advance issues of in terest to Members and to keep the WTO relevant. As we said earlier in previous 
discussions, the various rigid positions expressed in this paper would seem to foreclose Members' 
ability to pursue creative and flexible approaches at the WTO to the challenges  of today and 
tomorrow. We have carefully reviewed the arguments put forward in this paper and remain 
unconvinced based on the merits. The fact that participants in the Services Domestic Regulation JSI 
represent over 90% of services trade demonstrates that  many others have reached the same 
conclusion.  
11.65.   The representative of Turkey  delivered the following statement:  
11.66.   Turkey, as an active participant of all JSIs, believes that this discussion is vital not only for 
the future of the existing JSIs but also for the entire organization.  We are all aware that multilateral 
decision making is the best way for a rules -based system in order to keep up with new and emerging 
issues. However, on some occasions, additional instruments and different configurations may be 
needed to foster and reinforce negotiations among Members.  
11.67.   JSIs continue to maintain their open, transparent and inclusive character and adhere to the 
fundamental principles of WTO and they contribute to the main objectives of this Organization.  We 
look forw ard to engage in further discussions with all Members on how these agreements can be 
integrated into the WTO rulebook.  
11.68.   The representative of Israel  delivered the following statement:  
11.69.   Israel has always been a strong supporter of the multilateral trading sys tem. As a relatively 
small however open economy , we strive to further develop our international trade and economic 
collaboration with countries around the world on the basis of the multilateral trading system and the 
WTO rules. Therefore, we recognize the importance of supporting a well -functioning WTO. Plurilateral 
Agreements o r JSIs should not replace multilateral efforts and we do prefer the latter. But 
plurilaterals do offer a complementary route that can deliver tangible results in new areas. The 
plurilateral channel is legitimate and it is open to all WTO Members, in fact, we believe that this 
channel keeps the WTO relevant in today's rapidly changing global trading system. Therefore, Israel 
intends to continue participating in all multilateral trade n egotiations and similarly in plurilateral 
negotiations in which it has a specific trade interest. We see both routes as viable and 
complementary of the rulemaking function of the WTO.  
11.70.   The representative of the Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
11.71.   The Philippines thanks India, South Africa and Namibia for their contribution.  They have 
raised an important legitimate concern over an equally important undertaking of a vast majority of 
WTO Members on possible outcomes that, in our view, will be benefic ial for the multilateral trading 
system. We wish to reiterate our prior statements and note that each JSI is different in nature and 
cannot be treated as one generic whole.  We believe that the substantive hurdles raised are not 
insurmountable should there be political will and goodwill to allow Members to collectively pursue 
work towards objectives that are not WTO -inconsistent. What would be unfortunate is to use WTO 
rules to frustrate such a quest. In any event, the Philippines stands ready to engage in a ny 
discussions of the issues at the opportune time.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 105 - 
 
  11.72.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
11.73.   The institutional issue of all negotiated documents under the roof of the WTO should be 
considered as not less than necessary. Indonesia holds the view that ambition and urge to generate 
a particular discipline within the WTO must be in line with the rules agreed by all of us at the 
beginning of this organization. We have carefully listened to several views by Members that , 
particularly in the state of the modern economy , have served as the push to move forward with the 
ongoing initiatives. However, we are of the view that this motive is here to serve as the solution to 
address concerns on how this initiative may fulfil the clear prerequisites to introduce new rules in 
the WTO, as clearly said in the Marrakesh Agreement. As an Organization based on a rules -based 
system, failure to follow these rules will not only jeopardize the legitimacy of future Agreements but 
also the Organizat ion as a whole. We also hold the view that this Organization should always serve 
its purpose to seek the benefit of all Members. It is our common interest for all Members to be able 
to reap the economic benefit from their participation in global trade.   
11.74.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
11.75.   We thank the authors of the document presented under this agenda item. However, 
Switzerland does not share the views expressed in it.  We consider that plurilateral initiatives are an 
integral part of the WTO and the GATT system that preceded it.  Joint Declaration Initiatives are an 
appropriate instrument to develop the trading system and strengthen the negotiating function of the 
WTO. It is also a flexible and effective way to respond to t he needs of today's economy. Like the 
European Union, we believe that it is preferable for this work to take place under the auspices of the 
WTO to ensure transparency and to allow the participation of as many Members as possible.  
11.76.   I would add that initiati ves emanating from joint declarations do not affect the obligations 
of Members that do not participate in them and, in many cases, these initiatives will extend their 
rights under the application of the most favoured nation (MFN) clause.  
11.77.   The representative  of Singapore delivered the following statement:  
11.78.   Singapore's positions on the legal status of JSI s has been made abundantly clear in the past 
meetings. Hence, I'll just make three quick points. First, the JSIs represent an important vehicle to 
buttress the  WTO's continued relevance. In fact, if the WTO does not address the rapidly -changing 
global economic and trading environment, it risks being marginalised. As Director -General Ngozi 
said last week, "our stakeholders will simply take their business elsewher e"" when they see that we 
cannot deliver. During the recent WTO 's Public Forum, there was almost unanimous chorus of 
support from all our stakeholders for the JSI.  
11.79.   Second, plurilaterals such as the JSIs have always been a part of the multilateral trading 
system. More importantly, it is misleading to claim that a decision is necessary by the Ministerial 
Conference in order to launch the plurilateral  negotiations.   
11.80.   Third, the JSIs are building blocks towards multilateralism. They represent a promising way 
to make progress as they allow members who are ready and willing to move at a faster pace while 
remaining inclusive, by keeping the door open for other members to come on board when they are 
ready  
11.81.   The usefulness of JSIs is evidenced by the fa ct that over 140 WTO Members participate in 
at least one JSI, and barely 20 Members sit out completely.  
11.82.   The representative of Nigeria delivered the following statement:  
11.83.   We are in the 21st century , and during this period we must be creative and we must ac cept 
the present reality in order to improve global trade. We know that the discussion on JSI s at the 
moment is at the plurilateral level, but utmost ambition by Members of the JSI s to proceed into 
multilateral level. Moreover, plurilateral is not a replac ement to multilateral, rather a 
complementarity. We have made a categorical statement in the last General Council meeting of July WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 106 - 
 
  and we still need to maintain our statement that we have made in that meeting so it would be 
reflected under this item.11 
11.84.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
11.85.   We thank the Members that have taken the floor. I thank the E uropean Union for 
acknowledging the need for a discussion on this pertinent issue.  We believe that as an international 
organisation, the WTO must operate within the parameters of the legal instrument that constituted 
it, being the Agreement Establishing the World Trade  Organization (Marrakesh Agreement).  The 
Marrakesh Agreement must be interpreted "in good faith in accordance with the ordinary meaning 
to be given to the terms of the treaty in its context and in light of its object and purpose ". 
11.86.   The Preamble of the Marra kesh Agreement is clear that the aim is to create "an integrated, 
more viable multilateral trading system " among Members. The Joint Statement Initiatives ' (JSIs) 
aim to develop and adopt new rules on existing and new trade -related matters among a sub -group  
of WTO Members through modalities confront the WTO 's foundational commitments to 
multilateralism, consensus decision -making and the development acquis.  
11.87.   The Appellate Body Report in Brazil – Desiccated Coconut emphasizes the objective set out 
in the Preamb le of developing "an integrated, more viable and durable multilateral trading system ", 
and it says "[t]he authors of the new WTO regime intended to put an end to the fragmentation that 
had characterized the previous system ". The "previous system " to which they refer was the system 
of Plurilateral Codes that came into existence after the Tokyo Round of the GATT.  
11.88.   The Marrakesh Agreement does not make provision for the so -called open plurilaterals and 
flexible multilateralism. Therefore, any suggestion that w hen offered on MFN basis, no consensus is 
required for bringing new rules into the WTO is legally inconsistent with the fundamental principles 
and procedures of Marrakesh Agreement.  Importantly, new rules cannot be brought into the WTO 
through amendment of  Members` Schedules.  
11.89.   We need to be aware that introducing variable geometry into WTO negotiations would create 
an "inherently discriminatory multi -tiered multispeed trading system,  (...) reinforce asymmetrical 
bargaining power ". 12 This will worsen an alre ady challenging situation wherein agreed mandates and 
issues are put in the periphery. We are already witnessing this in the context of the Doha Round 
where concerns of developing countries to rebalance WTO rules, obligations and commitments which 
were pro mised as the price for agreeing to the Uruguay round now remain largely unfulfilled.  
11.90.   The question is what the implications are of launching JSIs on issues with a multilateral 
mandate. For example , the three substantive JSIs on electronic commerce, investm ent facilitation, 
and disciplines on domestic regulation of services are circumventing existing mandates. E -commerce 
has a multilateral mandate through the 1998 Work Programme. Investment Facilitation has a 
negative mandate - the General Council made a exp ress consensus decision in the July 2004 package 
that any work towards negotiations on the "relationship between trade and investment " would be 
excluded from WTO until the formal conclusion of the Doha round . Domestic Regulation  is supposed 
to be addressed through the W orking Party on Domestic Regulation . 
11.91.   The paper seeks to remind us of the legal architecture that governs the functioning of the 
WTO and to highlight the systemic importance of preserving its multilateral character.  We have 
highlighte d what our understanding of the legal options and it would be important for the 
Membership to engage with the issues. We appreciate that the Chair of the I nvestment Facilitation  
has raised the legal questions with the participants as there is a need for th e systemic issues that 
arise need to be addressed. We would appreciate a better understanding of which aspects Members 
do not agree with and we would be happy to engage with Members.  
11.92.   The JSIs introduce systemic and developmental challenges that the Members hip must reflect 
on. These have implications for decision making in the WTO. The result is marginalization of existing 
multilateral mandates arrived at through consensus in favour of matters without multilateral 
 
11 The statement delivered by Nigeria  at the General Council Meeting held on 27-28 July 2021 is contained 
in document WT/GC/M/192, para. 14.9 and included by reference in the minutes of this meeting.  
12 Michael Trebilcock, "Between Theories of Trade and Development. The Future of the World Trading 
System ", Journal of World Investment & Trade 16 (2015) 122 -140, 132 (Trebilcock 2015 ). WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 107 - 
 
  mandates. In the process, issues which are d ifficult but fundamental to the multilateral trading 
system, such as agriculture, development, and S&D are relegated to the periphery. This creates 
imbalances in agenda setting, negotiating processes and outcomes.  
11.93.   As my delegation has previously observed, there is a difference between sectoral 
negotiations that change schedules vs rules. A procedure for amending rules is enshrined in Article  X 
of the Marrakesh Agreement. On the other hand, the GATT and GATS contain specific provisions for 
modifications of S chedules. It is therefore important to respect this difference.  
11.94.   Some of the relevant questions that need to be considered are:  Can any group of Members 
come up with an idea and bring it into the WTO under a JSI and what does that mean for the 
multilateral character of the WTO?  Will this not fragment the MTS?  What lessons can be drawn from 
the GATT and predictability of rules when you have different rules applying to different Members?  
How and whether Members can bring new rules not agreed by consensus into the WTO without 
following the processes and provisions entailed in the Marrakesh Agreement?  What are the 
implications of JSIs in addressing issues that have a multilateral mandate, thus subverting the 
multilateral directives?  What does this mean for the Membership and the Secretariat?  
11.95.   We do not question the right for any group of Members to discuss any issue informally, but 
where such discussions turn into negotiations, and their outcomes are sought to be formalized into 
the WTO framework, this can only be done in accordance with the rules set out in the Marrakesh 
Agreement. We urge the Membership to reflect on these questions with a view to uphold the 
principles of multilateralism that underpin this institution and are so critical at this critical time.  For 
us it is not the number of proponents or co -sponsors but the need to need to preserve the rules, 
otherwise issues advanced by the majority such as the G90 SD T proposals would be approved.  
11.96.   The representative of Mexico  delivered the following statement:  
11.97.   I want to repeat what I have said in previous occasions , that we subscribe to what other 
Members have said today with regard to the pertinence and relevance of plurilateral agreements at 
the WTO.  
11.98.   The representative of Zimbabwe  delivered the following statement:  
11.99.   We refer to our previous statement on this issue a nd await for concrete responses from JSI 
proponents. We believe in the sanctity of WTO Agreements, and would ask those Members that are 
sponsoring those various JSIs to address the questions raised by the co -sponsors.  
11.100.   The representative of Tunisia  provide d the following statement:  
11.101.   My delegation thanks the proponents for their submission and reiterates its commitment 
to the WTO as an advocate of the rules -based multilateral trading system, in which decisions are 
adopted by consensus.  Plurilateralism remain s an exception, as a basis for negotiating either new 
rules or wholly new plurilateral Agreements.  
11.102.   The progress made in discussions on the work on Joint Initiatives should not deviate from 
their informal framework. The formalization of their results under WTO rules can only occur in 
accordance with the rules of procedure for amendments and decision making, as provided for in the 
Marrakesh Agreement.  
11.103.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
12  CHAIRMANSHIP OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT PROCUREMEN T – AUSTRALIA; 
CANADA; THE EUROPEAN UNION; ISRAEL; JAPAN; MONTENEGRO; NEW ZEALAND; THE 
SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND MATSU; UNITED 
KINGDOM; AND THE UNITED STATES  
12.1.   The Chair  recalled that this item had been added to the agenda for the second time, at the 
request of the European Union on behalf of a number of Members, as indicated in the agenda . WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 108 - 
 
  12.2.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
12.3.   The United States is delivering this statement on behalf of Australia, Canada, the European 
Union, Iceland, Israel, Japan, Liechtenstein, Montenegro, Norway, New Zealand, the Separate 
Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu (Chinese Taipei), the United Kingdom and 
Switzerland. This is the second occasion that a group of GPA Parties feels compelled to bring the 
issue of the Chairmanship of the Committee on Government Procurement to the attention of the 
General Council. We do so with an increasi ng sense of concern over the continued impasse.  
12.4.   The GPA Parties would like briefly to recall the process that has led us here. The GPA 
Committee started its process to select a new Chair in January. Only the twenty -one Parties to this 
Agreement are involv ed in this exercise and accession candidates or Observers are not entitled to 
participate. Two candidates were nominated by GPA Parties, one from Chinese Taipei and one from 
Poland. In the following weeks, a significant majority emerged in favour of the ca ndidate from 
Chinese Taipei, which led the Polish representative to withdraw from the race, leaving only the 
candidate from Chinese Taipei. We wish to emphasise that the process was run with integrity, 
inclusiveness and transparency, and was based only on the merits and qualifications of the 
candidates. We are confident that the candidate from Chinese Taipei would be able to uphold the 
Chair 's duty to act in an entirely impartial manner, including with regards to all ongoing and potential 
future accessions to the GPA.  
12.5.   The GPA Parties subsequently met many times, formally or informally, in an effort to appoint 
the candidate from Chinese Taipei: on 28 May, 2 June, 16 July, and most recently again on 6 October. 
During each of these meetings, Hong Kong, China i ntervened to block consensus. It indicated in this 
Council in July that it could not support the candidate from Chinese Taipei on the grounds that such 
a "proposal will not be conducive to advancing the work of the Committee on Government 
Procurement, or t he accession of new GPA Parties ". No further explanation has been offered to 
substantiate this view.  
12.6.   The Parties wish to recall that the terms and conditions of Chinese Taipei 's membership of the 
WTO were agreed in detail in 2001. These did not include an y limitation on the rights and privileges 
that Chinese Taipei may exercise as a member of this Organisation, including the right to chair WTO 
Committees. China, an Observer to the GPA, intervened on the item "Election of the Committee 's 
next Chair " during the GPA Committee meeting on 2 June 2021. Even though the selection of the 
Chair is a right and privilege reserved only for GPA Parties. China also intervened during our 
discussion on this issue in July at the General Council. It stated that "though the GP A Committee is 
a plurilateral Committee, it is still under the WTO framework. If any decision made in the GPA will 
have spill -overs on non -GPA Party sensitivities, the GPA parties should give attention and respect to 
such sensitivities of non -Parties ".  
12.7.   We wish to emphasise that the decision to appoint the GPA Chair will not have any impact on 
non-GPA Parties as the GPA Chair, like all Chairs of WTO committees, has a duty to act in an entirely 
impartial manner. We also remind China that the decision is up t o GPA Parties alone, as agreed to 
in the revised GPA, and similar to all other plurilateral agreements.  
12.8.   In our capacities as both WTO Members and GPA Parties, we are therefore deeply concerned 
that the GPA Committee's functioning continues to be undermine d. A continued blockage carries the 
risk that the GPA Committee will not be able to meet as scheduled later this month, noting that the 
outgoing Chair departed from Geneva on 21 July 2021. This would seriously affect the functioning 
of the Agreement. We th erefore urge Hong Kong, China – a WTO Member that has long played a 
valued and constructive role in the WTO as well as the GPA Committee - to reconsider its position 
and join consensus to appoint the one remaining candidate as the next Chair of the GPA Com mittee. 
We also remind the non -GPA Parties that they are not entitled to engage in the selection of the GPA 
Committee Chair.  
12.9.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  delivered the following statement:  
12.10.   Members would note that this is the second time that we have this item on the agenda, and 
Members would also recall that almost the same group of Members proposed to discuss the same 
matter at the previous General Council meeting just before the summer break, to which Hong Kong, 
China already responded by setti ng out our observations and position at the same meeting.   WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 109 - 
 
  12.11.   Regrettably, there has been little progress in the matter since then, so I am not going to 
rehearse all the points I have made before and would refer Members to Hong Kong, China' s 
statement deliver ed at the July General Council meeting.  
12.12.   Perhaps I would just reiterate that Hong Kong, China  is unable to join any consensus to 
designate the Chinese Taipei candidate as the next Chair of the Committee on Government 
Procurement (CGP), and that our position  is formulated with the WTO 's broader interests in mind.  
Hong Kong, China  does not support designating the C hinese Taipei candidate as the next CGP Chair 
because we do not believe it will be conducive to advancing the various work programmes of the 
CGP.  
12.13.   As we explained last time, Hong Kong, China  had made two suggestions to try to resolve 
the impasse and provide an interim solution, but unfortunately both suggestions were rejected by 
other GPA Parties without much discussion – it seems that other Parties t hink that the only way 
forward is for Hong Kong, China  to reverse its position and defer to their preference, but I am afraid 
this would not be conducive to developing a solution acceptable to all.  
12.14.   Hong Kong, China all along upholds WTO 's long -established and important principle of 
making decisions by consensus, and we strongly believe that it is WTO 's core value that all views 
should be respected.   
12.15.   The Agreement on Government Procurement (GPA) is a plurilateral agreement.  According to 
the Guidelines for Appointment of Officers to WTO Bodies ( document WT/L/510), the CGP, as a body 
established by plurilateral trade agreement, should decide on the selection criteria of its 
chairmanship and other related matters itself.  Hong Kong, China stands ready to work constructively 
with other GPA Parties to select the next CGP Chair in accordance with WTO 's long -established 
tradition of making decisions by consensus.  
12.16.   Hong Kong, China  would appeal to all GPA Parties to re -engage in the discussion and explo re 
our two suggestions, which have been adopted as interim arrangements in other WTO bodies before, 
and/or any other practical options that are in line with the established practices of the WTO.  
12.17.   The representative of China delivered the following statement:  
12.18.   If my memory and records are reliable, a subsidiary body Chair selection impasse to be 
raised in the G eneral Council  meeting agenda has never happened before, but for the GPA Committee 
it is the second time. More than that, as a subsidiary body,  this Chair selection impasse has never 
been submitted to any up -level Chair, including G eneral Council  Chair for coordination, but directly 
comes to the G eneral Council  meeting. It is not the way the WTO works. For such reasons and for 
the interest of the  majority of Members I should have blocked the meeting agenda from being 
adopted but I did not. If people want to try, let them try, in the end we all know what the pragmatic 
way to solve the problem is. Wasting the public resources is not what I want to e ncourage.  
12.19.    China regrets that the Chair of the GPA Committee has not been selected yet as we all 
believe in the Chair selection of relevant bodies in the organization have an uncontroversial and 
consensual candidate matters a lot to this committee as well as this organization and finally Members 
as a whole. In the statement delivered by Hong Kong , China both in the GPA Committee and G eneral 
Council  in July and repeated just now were clearly stated their positions and concerns on the 
candidate. In the meanti me, they also suggested constructive proposals unfortunately suggestions 
proposed by Hong Kong , China have never been seriously discussed.  
12.20.   From the proponents' interventions I can hear one message, consensus cannot be reached 
because one Party blocks so t his Party must join consensus, this Party must swallow what it cannot 
swallow, if it is a logic of the proponents of this article I will ask whether proponents themselves 
have followed this logic, can we start A ppellate Body selection right now?  
12.21.   There is an old saying in China: one should not impose on others what he himself does not 
desire. Hong Kong , China is a small Member but small Members also have the interests and the 
concerns, small Members also have the right to say no when they cannot agree. S o, the key issue 
the GPA Committee is facing is consensus cannot be reached on the candidate rather than anything 
else. Such situation is not rare in the WTO but why this time it became so difficult even as mentioned WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 110 - 
 
  by proponents themselves this would und ermine the function of GPA Committee. It is because the 
proponents insist to appoint a candidate to be the Chair of GPA Committee even this candidate 
cannot get full support of all GPA parties.  
12.22.   As we are all aware, the WTO has long principles, guidelines and practices on Chair selection, 
when Members cannot reach consensus on a candidate, the candidate should withdraw from the 
selection process and Members should seek other pragmatic approach to solve the issue. Given the 
current situation in GPA Committee  we cannot stop asking who is undermining the GPA Chair 
selection process and who is undermining GPA function.  
12.23.   We also want to highlight that according to the document namely Decisions on Procedure 
Matters under the Agreement on Government Procurement 199 4 observers may participate in the 
discussions, but decision shall be taken only by Parties. So, China as an observer to GPA has a right 
to participate in the discussions on the item regarding GPA Committees' Chair selection but of course 
the decision is t aken only by all GPA Parties. We have clearly indicated many times that as an active 
Member in accession to GPA, China is concerned with and closely following the Chair selection 
process, we have no intention to interfere the GPA Committee Chair selection and we fully respect 
the selection result based on consensus by GPA Parties.  
12.24.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement : 
12.25.   Like many GPA Parties, we are disappointed that Hong Kong, China is still not able to join 
the consensus. H ong Kong, China raised some broad, vague and unclear reasons in the formal and 
informal CGP meetings and in this and previous G eneral Council  Meetings, such as its blocking is for 
"WTO broader interest " and our candidate "will not be conducive to advancing the work of the 
Committee and accession of new GPA Parties ". Hong Kong, China is yet to explain exactly why the 
candidate, who has gained 20 GPA Parties ' support, "will not be conducive to advancing the work of 
the Committee and accession of new GPA Parties" or would act against the "WTO broader interest ". 
12.26.   As we indicated in the last G eneral Council  meeting, and let me firmly assure again that, the 
elected Chair is obliged and, definitely, will act in a fair, impartial and transparent manner when 
handling all related matters, including matters regarding China 's accession to the GPA.  
12.27.   As stated by many GPA Parties in the formal and informal CGP meetings and in this and 
previous G eneral Council  Meetings, when they decide which candidate is their prefe rence, the only 
factors they consider are experiences, skill, expertise and other merits of the candidates. These 
merits should also be the only factors to decide the qualification of Chairmanship. If we allow WTO 
Members or GPA Parties to use unfounded re asons as the basis to deny a qualified candidate, we 
risk jeopardizing  the long -established tradition, the integrity of CGP Chair's election process and the 
operation of this Organization.  
12.28.   Hong Kong, China mentioned that it has proposed solutions. However,  the proposed 
solutions were not in line with the spirit of the general principles and practices. Regarding its proposal 
of restarting the election, as other Members have pointed out, the selection process was conducted 
by the Committee 's previous chair wi th highest extent of fairness, impartiality, transparency and 
integrity. There is lack of any justifiable reason to restart the process all over again.  
12.29.   Regarding Hong Kong, China 's suggestion of having a WTO official to serve as a Chair, it is 
neither appropriate, nor in line with the CGP 's practices.  
12.30.   The CGP Chair 's election is different from all other Committee Chairs' selection. The CGP 
Chair 's election includes the following well -established detailed procedure: First, the incumbent Chair 
announces the commencement of the election process and invite interested candidates to register. 
Second, interested candidates from GPA Parties will register for election. Third, the registered 
candidates are given a period of time to outreach every GPA Part y to present their visions and plans 
for the works of the Committee. The candidates also have to answer the Parties ' questions during 
their presentation and interview. Fourth, the incumbent Chair will conduct consultations with each 
and every Party to iden tify which candidate receives most support. The information collected by the 
incumbent Chair serves as the basis for his or her proposal on the appointment of the new Chair of 
the CGP. And finally, the other competing candidates withdraw from the process t o allow the 
Committee 's adoption on the appointment of the new Chair.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 111 - 
 
  12.31.   There is no other WTO Council or Committee having a similarly detailed process for the 
selection of their respective Chairs, neither has there been any previous practice having a WTO 
official serving as an interim Chair, which is supposed to be elected through such strict election 
process.  
12.32.   In the most recent ad -hoc CGP meeting held on 6 October this year, we proposed a solution, 
i.e., the elected candidate from our Mission serves as the Chair and a colleague from Hong Kong, 
China serves as a Vice-Chair. Our suggestion received wide supports from other GPA Parties and is 
recognized as a solution to resolve the impasse , while still maintaining the integrity of the result of 
the election pro cess. With Hong Kong, China 's concern in mind, we proposed such solution with good 
faith to facilitate consensus.  We hope Hong Kong, China will consider our suggestion and join the 
consensus so that the Committee can have a Chair as soon as possible and will function again.  
12.33.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  delivered the following statement:  
12.34.   I thank C hinese Taipei for its latest proposal of inviting Hong Kong, China  as CGP 's Vice -
Chair if it becomes the Chair, which was first conveyed to  us at an ad -hoc informal meeting held 
just before this G eneral Council  meeting.  We are still deliberating on the proposal with our colleagues 
in capital, but I note that the proposal would involve creating a new post – Vice-Chair – in the CGP, 
which has n ot been formally deliberated among committee members.  
12.35.   I wish to point out that Hong Kong, China does not support designating C hinese Taipei's  
candidate as the next CGP Chair because of consideration of the broader interests of the WTO, not 
because Hong Kong, China was interested in the CGP Chair post or any new post to be created.  From 
Hong Kong, China's  perspective, the proposal may not be abl e to address the issue before us.  
12.36.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement : 
12.37.   Japan regrets that Hong Kong, China, intervened to block the consensus again at the 
informal meeting of the Committee on Government Procurement that took plac e on October 6 to 
discuss the selection of the new Chair.  GPA Parties have important issues to discuss in the Committee 
on Government Procurement, including that of Member accession. The Committee 's function must 
not be disrupted.  
12.38.   As only the Parties to the GPA are entitled to participate in the Committee 's process of 
selecting a new Chair, we believe there are no grounds to the claim made at the previous meeting 
that the Parties need to consider the sensitivities of non -Parties. The advancemen t of accession 
negotiations with the Parties is solely dependent on the market access offer from an applicant 
Member. We believe that the Chair can be selected from any Party without this having any negative 
affect on the accession process.  
12.39.   We would like to stress that the Chair for the Committee on Government Procurement must 
be selected based only on the merits and qualifications of the candidate. All the Parties, except for 
Hong Kong, China, are of the view that the only remaining candidate is qualified  to serve as Chair. 
However, Hong Kong, China, has not explained the reason why it believes that selecting the 
candidate will not be conducive to the Committee 's work.  We urge Hong Kong, China, to reconsider 
its position and join the consensus as soon as p ossible.  
12.40.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
13  APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS TO WTO BODIES - REPORT BY THE CHAIR13 
13.1.   The Chair  recalled that the appointment process for Chairs of CTG subsidiary bodies had been  
particularly challenging this year. At the request of Members, he had  undert aken consultations as 
GC Chair to find a solution to the impasse, and the issue had been  resolved at the July m eeting of 
the General Council.  
13.2.   As part of the agreed solution, it had been  decided that he should urgently begin consultations 
on the overall process of the appointment of officers in his capacity as G eneral Council  Chair. In this 
 
13 The Chair's statement was circulated in document JOB/GC/27 7. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 112 - 
 
  regard, he had  invited all interested delegations for consultations on 13 September. Thirteen 
delegations, including  all the regional group coordinators, had come  forward to share their views. 
The Chair thank ed all of them for their useful suggestions and constructive engagement.  
13.3.   During th ose consultations, most Members had expressed that the Guidelines for Appointment 
of Officers in WT/L/510 remain ed a good foundation for the appointments process. They continue d 
to see value in the principles enshrined therein, including transparency, overall balance of 
representation and the "housekeeping" nature of the process. Severa l Members had also noted that 
those Guidelines should not be re -negotiated.  
13.4.   At the same time, Members had also stressed that, despite the Guidelines, they had often 
confronted issues in appointing Chairs in WTO bodies under the General Council – the so -called "tier 
one" – as well as in the CTG and CTS subsidiary bodies – the "tier two". Issues had also been raised 
in past years: for instance, back in 2012, an intensive process of consultations had been  undertaken 
by the then General Council Chair, which had resulted in the "Practical Steps to improve the 
implementation of the Guidelines" in JOB/GC/22. Again, in 2016, the General Council had discussed 
similar issues which had resulted in an early start of the process and a tutorial by the then G eneral 
Council  Chair on the Guidelines and Practical Steps.  
13.5.   In the consultations he had  conducted, the Chair had  heard some recurring themes and he 
had have taken note of some useful suggestions from Members that built on the Guidelines and 
Practical Steps that could help address issues. These were mainly in three areas: (i) transparency 
and process; (ii) rotation; and (iii) representation.  
Transparency and Process  
13.6.   On transparency and process, concerns had focused on a p erceived lack of transparency as a 
source of the difficulties faced during recent appointment cycles. Suggestions had been  mainly made 
to de-mystify the process.  
13.7.   As a way forward, several delegations had suggested that the selection committee report to 
all delegations at each stage of the process through a written communication. This should include 
proposed nominations, as well as any understandings. On this point, the Chair  recall ed that all 
delegations, not just group coordinators, could  come forward and  consult with the selection 
committee.  
13.8.   The Chair also recall ed that, as part of their role, regional coordinators were responsible for 
updating their Members of their consultations, relaying their group's concerns to the selection 
committee, ensuring a sm ooth transition between the outgoing and the incoming coordinator and 
settling internal issues within their groups.  
13.9.   Still on process, a number of Members had suggested that, for purposes of paragraphs 7.1  (a) 
and 7.3 of the Guidelines, the process of appoi ntment of officers should start earlier, possibly at the 
end of each year, and that the appointment process for the so called "tier two" – that is the subsidiary 
bodies of CTG and CTS in Groups 6(A) and 6(B) of the Guidelines , should start at the same time  as 
the one for "tier one", that is the General Council and its subsidiary bodies groups, in 1, 2, 4 and 5 
of the Guidelines. Suggestions had been  made that both processes should be concluded and agreed 
by the first General Council meeting of the year.  
13.10.   Specifically, on the Appointment of Chairs of CTG and CTS subsidiary bodies, suggestions 
had been  made that the list of candidatures should be received before the end of the year, and also 
that Chair nominations for these bodies should be proposed by the resp ective Committees.  
Rotation  
13.11.   Some Members had expressed concerns about the practical implementation of the principle 
of rotation, particularly with respect to the rotation between developed and developing Members. 
The Chair recalled  that rotation was based on the principle of finding an overall balanc e of 
representation.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 113 - 
 
  13.12.   Following the history of appointment processes, it would be noted that only two WTO bodies 
– the General Council and the Dispute Settlement Body – had strictly rotated between developed 
and developing Members. Some delegations had suggested that the rotation for the General Council 
and the Dispute Settlement Body should instead be among the four groupings – therefore with 
developed Members, Africa, Asia and the Pacific and Latin America and the Caribbean alternating.  
13.13.   Another suggestion made had been  to apply strict rotation among the four groups in all WTO 
bodies and to earmark a fixed number of WTO bodies to each group per cycle depending on the 
group's size.  
Representation  
13.14.   Another recurring issue was related to Members who were not par t of any regional group. 
Some had suggested that th ose Members could form their own group. Meanwhile, others had 
expressed reservations. This was an issue that require d further reflection with a view to finding a 
solution for those Members that d id not hav e regional representation.  
13.15.   Other delegations had suggested that th ose Members could be a part of their group.  
13.16.   The Chair also remind ed delegations that th ose Members ha d the right to consult with the 
selection committee at any point, and they could  certainl y submit their own candidature. There were 
precedents in recent appointment cycles where Members not belonging to any group ha d been 
elected as Chairs of regular bodies.  
Other Matters  
13.17.   Several Members had also referred to the need to reaffirm some specific points that were 
already enshrined in the Guidelines and the Practical Steps. Th ose include d the "housekeeping" 
nature of the process, exercising restraint in blocking consensus, highlighting the qualific ations and 
requirements for appointment, particularly paragraphs 2.2 and 2.3 of the Guidelines, taking into 
account Members' sensitivities, and addressing conflict of interest, among others. On the latter, a 
suggestion had been  made that regional coordinat ors should not put forward candidatures for their 
delegations to avoid any conflict of interest.  
13.18.   Other suggestions had also been put forward. For instance, a suggestion had been  made by 
one delegation to have Vice Chairs for subsidiary bodies or at least f or the most active ones – as 
was already the case for some; others mentioned re -vamping the regional groupings and applying 
the Guidelines to Plurilateral Agreements, among others. Strong reservations had been expressed 
by some Members on th ose points I me ntioned.  
13.19.   More detailed suggestions had been  provided as well by individual delegations, particularly 
on the process. The Chair's  report had covered the main, recurring themes that he had  heard from 
Members. As a Member -driven organization, the shape of the  way forward would  depend on 
Members . But one thing was clear. There was a  need to find a mutually agreeable way forward. And 
the report, which was based on Members' suggestions, coupled with Members'  interventions, could 
form a foundation to facilitate the resolution of th e matter. Looking ahead, the Chair noted the need 
to make progress by the next meeting of the General Council so that any solution could  be 
implemented in the next appointment cycle which, as delegations had stressed, should start earlier. 
With that in mind, he intend ed to continue consultations in a range of formats, including in groups. 
To ensure transparency and inclusiveness, he would  keep all Members regularly updated on this 
process.  
13.20.   The representative of India delivered  the following statement:  
13.21.   Thank you Chair for your statement and for initiating this process to review the existing 
guidelines at the request of my delegation and also others.  As we had stated in our intervention on 
this issue at various fora, the current process is arbitrary and lacks transparency.  It also does not 
ensure proper rotation of Chairs and does not always achieve balanced representation of Membership 
from different groups.  The lack of clear -cut guidelines has also allowed side deals amo ng the 
facilitators/office bearers, which the rest of the Membership are not aware of.  Therefore, during the WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 114 - 
 
  consultations we had provided you with some suggestions and ideas, both orally and through written 
submission, for the benefit of larger membership . I wish to highlight some of them:  
Representation  
13.22.   The representation for each group in a year should be prefixed depending on the size of the 
group, namely, Developed, AGDC, GRULAC, Africa and countries which do not fall in any of these 
groups.  
Rotation System  
13.23.   The Chairmanship of each Committee should sequentially rotate between different groups.  
The current practice of Developed Group alternating with the other regional groups should be done 
away with.  This amounts to reverse S&DT for developed countries.  
13.24.   If any group is not interested to stake its claim over the Chairmanship of a particular 
Committee for that year, then it will automatically go to the next group in a sequential manner.  The 
same should be announced to all the Members.  A Group ca n switch/swap the membership of a 
Committee with an another interested Group, with such arrangements being informed to the 
Membership in a transparent manner.  If a group foregoes its chance of a particular Committee during 
the year in which its turn was, n or enters into a reciprocal arrangement with another Group, then it 
will forfeit its representation for that year and it would have to wait for its next turn only after the 
rest of the groups have had their chance.   
13.25.   If any Group does not send nominations f or the Chair of a particular committee for which 
it's turn was nor is exchanging it with other Group, then that position should be offered to the next 
Group in the second stage of selection process. This process can be repeated till we find a candidate 
from a regional group for the Chair.  
Transparency  
13.26.   At every stage of the selection process, there should be a clear -cut communication process 
for the benefit of Members for transparency.  The full list of Chairmanships on offer, including for 
which groups, shou ld be published right at the beginning of selection process.  The Regional 
Coordinator shall provide the initial slates of vacancies available to the group, the nominations 
received, the internal process on handling multiple nominations within the group. On ce the 
negotiations are completed within the Group and list of nominations finalised, then only the RC shall 
provide the nominations to respective office bearers for finalisation. R egional Coordinators  shall 
initiate similar round of consultations within t he Group for vacancies not filled in the first round due 
to non -receipt of nominations, and has been offered to the Group in the second subsequent rounds.  
13.27.   There should be clear process for handing over of the selection process matter between 
incoming and outgoing Chairs of different bodies, under supervision of the GC Chair. If there are 
any understandings, agreements reached between Members during the select process in a given 
year, either within their Regional Groups or between Groups, for future years, the same should be 
brought to the attention of the Members in a clear and transparent manner, with the cognisance of 
the GC Chair. Otherwise, such understandings are deemed to be null and void.  
Conflict of interest  
13.28.   The Regional Coordinators should not be nominating either themselves or their country 
delegates for Chairmanship of any Committees during their role as Regional Coordinator . If they 
wish to nominate themselves or their country delegates for Chairmanship (s) during a particular year, 
then they need  to recuse themselves of the Regional Coordinator role during that period.  
13.29.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
13.30.   The European Union thanks the Chair for his engagement. We have suggested ways of 
improving the procedures of appointment of officers. We understand there could be two options: 
either to  'renew our vows ' and apply more discipline to agreed procedures; or to have a bottom up 
approach of selecting chairs in Committees themselves. It seems the preferenc e of most is to build WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 115 - 
 
  on the procedures that have been agreed in the past. The E uropean Union looks forward to working 
with the chair to find a way forward.  
13.31.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
13.32.   Thank you, Chair fo r your active participation in the process of reforming elections to the 
WTO subsidiary bodies. Russia is an active contributor to this process. We promptly submitted our 
proposals to the Chair for consideration. We suggest that existing rules of procedure s governing the 
election process will not be revised, but their implementation is improved, so that basic principles of 
these rules become more visible, operational and effective. Thus we propose, without changing laws, 
to improve law enforcement practice.  
13.33.   In particular, our proposals relate to earlier start of accumulating bids for the chairperson 
positions and internal group consultations;  introducing two -year slate of names, which will legitimize 
promises to secure chairmanship in a WTO working body in t he following year for the Member 
withdrawing its nomination in the current year;  highlighting the inadmissibility of politically 
motivated objections to a candidate and reminding that we elect persons, not WTO Members;  
mandatory vice -chairperson election f or all WTO bodies who steps in if current chairperson is not 
able to fulfil his/her responsibilities.  
13.34.   Some of these ideas were mentioned at the informal GC meeting the 29th of July. It 's 
regrettable that while the delegation of India requested these interv entions to be included into the 
minutes of the formal G eneral Council  meeting of the same day, not all of them appeared in those 
minutes. We hope that all statements would be used as additional feedback in the Chairs 
consultations. We hope that you, Chair will bring this process to its logical conclusion and we will be 
able to carry out the next round of elections without hindrance and blocking consensus, including 
politically motivated ones.  
13.35.   The representative of Mauritius, on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
13.36.   I want to say that you have done a lot of work on this, Chair, and we really appreciate the 
fact that this work is being carried further and that there will be more consultations. We look forward 
to working with you . We reiterate what we have said before, that the Guidelines we have in front of 
us have been quite good, but we need to be practical in approach when we are dealing with 
appointments. It is not a negotiation and it should reflect the diversity of the Members hip. We should 
remain guided by that in the spirit of cordiality that we all work together to have the best people 
representing us as Chair s of Committees. We look forward to looking both at the practical aspects 
and also the Guidelines , which  deserve some  more polishing.   
13.37.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
14  COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION - REPORT ON THE MEETING 
OF JULY 2021 (WT/BFA/197)  
14.1.   The Chair drew attention to the report from the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administra tion in WT/BFA/197.  
14.2.   Ambassador Bettina WALDMANN (Germany), Chair of the CBFA  provided the following 
statement:  
14.3.   My remarks will focus on key issues discussed at the meeting of the CBFA held on 12th July 
2021. The report of that meeting is contained in document WT/BFA/197. In particular, I will provide 
some highlights of the carry -over of conversations from the meeting, including progress made at 
the CBFA meeting held on 23 September.  
WTO 2022 -2023 Budget Proposal   
14.4.   As I mentioned when we las t met, a key priority is to ensure the timely passage of the 2022 -
2023 WTO and ITC budget proposals. In this regard, I am pleased to report to you that the WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 116 - 
 
  Committee has endorsed the ITC 2022 -2023 budget, in principle. However, this endorsement is 
continge nt upon the approval of the WTO budget.  
14.5.   For its part, the WTO budget proposal continues to be under consideration by the Committee. 
Some progress has been made. It would be a big success if the Committee can endorse the budget 
at its next meeting scheduled to be held on 22 October. This would allow sufficient time, for the 
General Council to approve the 2022 -2023 WTO and ITC budget proposals in November, before 
MC12. I hope the entire Membership will support this goal. This would serve a strong mes sage of 
support for the multilateral trading system – and help create much needed positive momentum 
ahead of the Ministerial Conference. It would also help to secure, in a timely manner, continuation 
of the work of the WTO Secretariat for the benefit all W TO Members, including developing countries.  
As I indicated earlier, I plan to hold informal consultations with delegations to help reach this goal.  
2020 WTO Financial Performance Report and transfers between budgetary sections   
14.6.   As a separate matter, I am p leased to report that the CBFA has endorsed (at its meeting held 
on 23 September) the WTO Audited Financial Statements for the year ended 31 December 2020. 
The Committee has also endorsed the transfers between budgetary sections outlined in paragraph 
2.33 of document WT/BFA/W/560/Rev.1. These transfers are necessary to cover excess expenditure 
over approved appropriations by using savings from other budgetary sections. Both items will be 
submitted to the General Council for approval at its next formal meeti ng. 
Coherence in the Establishment and Management of WTO Trust Funds  
14.7.   Moving on, you will recall that another important priority area of work for the CBFA relates to 
the establishment and management of WTO Trust Funds. Conversations are continuing in a smal l 
group process, which is open to all delegations. Discussions are also underway in the formal 
Committee on revisions to Financial Regulation 19 (regarding voluntary contributions to the WTO 
and trust funds).  The issues at stake are multi -dimensional and c omplex. The CBFA reviewed a  
progress report by the Working Group at its meeting on 23 September. It is my hope that further 
progress can be made, and the Group will be able to report back to the CBFA with recommendations 
at a later point in time.  
Revision s to Financial Regulations  
14.8.   There is also the question concerning the approval by the General Council of the revisions to 
Financial Regulations 4, 17, 26, 27, 29, 37, 38 and 42 that were agreed in 2019, three years ago. 
At the meeting of the CBFA held on 12  July, I summed up my understanding, that there is no 
disagreement with respect to the revisions to those Financial Regulations. Moreover, Members have 
agreed on revisions to Financial Regulation 23 (which concerns use of any budgetary surpluses). 
Those re visions can therefore be reflected in the package of Financial Regulations to be submitted 
to the General Council for approval. However, more time is required for discussion of revisions to 
Financial Regulation 19 which I referred to earlier.  
14.9.   Looking ahead  it is my hope that the Committee will soon be in a position to submit a revised 
package of Financial Regulations to the General Council for approval.  
Proposed Utilization of the 2020 Budgetary Surplus – WT/BFA/W/565  
14.10.   Another matter that continues to be und er consideration by the Committee relates to 
proposed utilization of the 2020 Budgetary Surplus, of approximately CHF 11.7 million. I look forward 
to reporting on progress at the next meeting of the General Council.  
Structural Review of the WTO Secretariat  
14.11.   Let me also mention the issue of the structural review, as this is one of the key issues going 
forward for both the WTO Secretariat and for Members. I would also like to thank the DG for the 
update she provided at the informal TNC meeting held on 30 Septe mber, and I would like to 
encourage the Secretariat to build further on this practice going forward.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 117 - 
 
  14.12.   The General Council took note  of Ambassador Waldmann's statement and adopted  the report 
in WT/BFA/19 7. 
15  OTHER BUSINESS  
15.1.   The Chair  recalled that t he General Council Procedures for Members and Observers subject to 
Administrative Measures in WT/BFA/132  require d that, at the end of each meeting of the General 
Council, the Chair of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration would provide 
informati on with regard to which Members and Observers were under Administrative Measures.  
15.2.   Ambassador Bettina Waldmann (Germany), Chair of the CBFA , provided the following 
statement:  
15.3.   The administrative measures applicable to Members and observers with arrears and 
contributions have been in place since 1 March 2013. In accordance with the decision of the General 
Council I shall state all Members and observers under all categories of administrative measures. As 
of 7 October 2021, there were 18 Members and 8 Observers  under administrative measures. 
Members in category 1, the following 7 Members are currently in category 1: Belize, Djibouti, Gabon, 
Mauritania, Papua New Guinea, Suriname and Yemen. Members in category 2 are Cuba and Guinea. 
Members in category 3, there i s a subdivision of Members that are not complying with the payment 
plan terms, so first the Members that are in arrears that are: Antigua and Barbuda, Congo, 
Democratic Republic of Congo, Senegal and Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Those Members that 
are not complying with the payment plans are the following: Burundi, Central African Republic, Chad, 
Guinea Bissau. Observers in category 1 are the following four: Comoros, Iran, Iraq, Sudan. 
Observers in category 2, there is only one, that is Syria. Observer s in category 3: Libya, Sao Tome 
and Principe, Somalia.   
15.4.   The representative of Cuba delivered the following statement:  
15.5.   At previous meetings, we have confirmed the strong will of my country to meet its financial 
commitments on the international stage , including those to the WTO budget. Today, I reiterate that 
statement. A number of Members have highlighted the negative impact on our economies caused 
by the pandemic, Cuba has also suffered from this. In our particular case, the situation has been 
aggravated b y the economic, financial and trade blockade imposed by the United States for more 
than 60 years. This embargo has intensified during the pandemic and has a notable impact on the 
financial sector . We have seen finance and other forms of sanctions against b anking institutes abroad 
who have conducted operations with Cuba, meaning that any transaction with Cuba has become 
more expensive and more complicated as a result of these coercive measures. In recent days, my 
country has been able to meet a part of its c ommitments through many operations in Swiss banks , 
due to the extraterritorial impact of these measures. We are days from the Ministerial Conference 
and you are working very hard on a possible outcome document . I invite you to consider the inclusion 
of the  effect of these measures on the normal trade relations among Members. It would be an 
important contribution.  
15.6.   The General Council took note  of the statements . 
 
_______________  
 
  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 118 - 
 
  ANNEX 1  
STATEMENT S BY THE CHAIR OF THE GENERAL COUNCIL ; H.E. CHOGUEL KOKALLA MAÏGA , 
PRIME MINISTER OF THE REPUBLIC OF MALI;  H.E. HAROUNA KABORE, MINISTER OF 
COMMERCE, INDUSTRY AND HANDICRAFTS OF BURKINA FASO; AND THE DIRECTOR -
GENERAL ON THE OCCASION OF WORLD COTTON DAY ON 7  OCTOBER 2021   
_______________  
 
 
STATEMENT BY AMBASSADOR DACIO CASTILLO, CHAIR OF THE GENERAL COUNCIL  
 
It is a privilege and an honour to warmly welcome to this session of the General Council the 
Honourable  Prime Minister of the Republic of Mali, Choguel Kokalla MAÏGA, who is making a special 
visit to Geneva on the occasion of World Cotton Day. He is accomp anied by the Honourable Minister 
of Rural Development of Mali, Modibo KEÏTA; and the Honourable Minister of Industry and Trade of 
Mali, Mahmoud OULD MOHAMED. Your presence here today, Excellencies, is a sign of the importance 
that Mali attaches to the WTO and to the work of this organization. Mr. Prime Minister, we look 
forward to hearing your address to the General Council.  
I likewise warmly welcome the Honourable Minister of Industry, Trade, and Handicrafts of Burkina 
Faso, Harouna KABORE, C -4 coordinator . May I also acknowledge the presence of the C -4 
Delegations who are here with us today to commemorate World Cotton Day. Welcome, your 
Excellencies. Your contributions to the work of this organization especially in promoting the cause of 
cotton are highly commendable.  
And as we speak of contributions to this organization, let me also welcome the Director -General of 
the WTO, Dr Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala who has joined us this afternoon.  
On this day, I would like to congratulate the C -4 on the UN Resolution recog nizing the 7 October as 
World Cotton Day. On behalf of the General Council, I commend the efforts of the C -4 in this regard 
and in advocating the cause of cotton and of those whose livelihoods depend on this sector.  
With these words, it is with great plea sure that I would now like to invite Prime Minister MAÏGA, to 
proceed to the lectern to address this General Council meeting.  
--- 
Thank you very much Minister Kabore for your address to the General Council.  Excellencies, your 
support, especially as we hea d towards MC12, is both well appreciated and much needed. I commend 
the work of the Cotton 4, the rest of the Membership and stakeholders who have been contributing 
to these efforts since the launch of the cotton initiative in 2003.  
I understand that the Director -General, Dr Ngozi, wishes to take the floor at this point.  
--- 
Thank you, Director - General, for your words. I also would like to thank the Honourable Prime 
Minister MAIGA of Mali, Minister KABORE of Burkina Faso, Minister Keïta, Minister Ould Mo hamed 
and their entire delegations for their visit and their address. We thank you for your participation.  
_______________  
 
  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 119 - 
 
  STATEMENT BY H.E. CHOGUEL KOKALLA MAÏGA, PRIME MINISTER OF THE REPUBLIC OF 
MALI  
 
It is my honour to take the floor this morning on behalf of the transitional President of Mali, 
Head of State, His Excellency Colonel Assimi Goïta and on behalf of the people of Mali and its 
Government to convey our sincere gratitude to the Secretariat of the World  Trade  Organization 
(WTO) for holding this third World Cotton Day, in spite of the current health situation, which is still 
a serious cause for concern.  
 
I would then like to extend my thanks to the Secretariats of the sister organizations of the WTO, 
such as the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO), the United Nations Conference 
on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the International Trade Centre (ITC), the Internatio nal Cotton 
Advisory Committee (ICAC), as well as the whole of the General Council for the particular interest 
and continued attention devoted to the emblematic cotton dossier at the WTO for nearly twenty 
years.  
 
By responding positively to the initiative o f the C4 (Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali and Chad), the WTO 
and partner institutions are showing their support for our countries' efforts to better integrate our 
economies into the multilateral trading system, a system which we aspire to see inclusive, 
transpar ent and based on rules that are followed by everyone.  
 
We will never tire of saying how crucial it is to comply with these principles in order to promote trade 
and investment, and ensure that our countries achieve sustainable development.  
 
Mali, as part of  the C4, is fully committed to working towards strengthening this multilateral system. 
My country is also totally committed to action, particularly that aimed at concrete and measurable 
outcomes that are likely to have a significant impact on the living co nditions of  millions of people 
who are, regrettably, still unable to fully enjoy the benefits and opportunities provided by 
international trade.  
 
I stand before you today to deliver a message from the cotton growers of Mali, and more generally, 
from their brothers and sisters in the other C4 countries and least -developed countries (LDCs).  
I do so with a tinge of bitterness but also with hope.  
 
I am bitter as a former Minister of Industry and Trade of my country. In this position, as 
spokesperson for the C4 countries, I had the honour of pleading the cause of African cotton at the 
WTO Ministerial Conference held in Cancún, Mexico, in 2003.  
 
That Conference did not live up to our expectations, but Cancún will forever remain the starting 
point for the powerful appeal that brought together the forces of the co -sponsors of the Sectoral 
Initiative in Favour of Cotton - Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali and Chad.  
 
These countries, considered the goliaths of cotton growing in Sub -Saharan Africa, succeeded for the 
first time to get the entire international community to rally around their cause and to bring the issue 
of cotton to multilateral negotiations with conviction, commitment and methodology.  
 
Since that time, a lot of water has passed over the Niger River in Bamako and also under the bridges 
that span Lake Geneva, but our farmers' hopes for a better life have yet to come true. This was due 
at times to a lack of brave political decisions, and at other times to non -compliance with 
commitments.  
 
What indeed was the request of the farmers of Sikasso in Mali, or Bobo -Dioulasso in Burkina  Faso, 
or even of Banikoara in Benin or Sarh in Chad? They did not ask for charity. They did not ask for 
pity or commiseration from the bigger players. They asked for justice, justice that is i ncompatible 
with trade -distorting domestic support.  
 
Because our farmers' complaints fell on deaf ears, our countries have seen a decline in resilience, 
and our cotton zones have become routes for migration and rural exodus, with the ensuing 
procession of tragedies in the Sahara and the Mediterranean Sea.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 120 - 
 
  Despite the bitter aftertaste of unfinished business, I still have hope; the farmers of Mali, of Africa 
and of LDCs still have hope that the multilateral forums will grant them their just re wards for their 
relentless work.  
 
The fact that the General Assembly of the United Nations - at its 75th session held on 
26 August  2020 - proclaimed 7  October as World Cotton Day is, in this respect, full of meaning and 
brings new hope to the 36 African co tton-producing countries and the 25  million cotton growers. We 
choose to believe that World Cotton Day will bring about a new era of solidarity and renewed moral 
obligation on the cotton issue.  
 
Beyond providing hope, you must make clear your political wil l to ensure that the forums in which 
you made commitments are not simply missed opportunities in the history of the world. In particular:  
 
- The Hong Kong Ministerial Conference held in December  2005, when the commitment to 
address the cotton issue "ambitiou sly, expeditiously and specifically" was reaffirmed. This 
mandate has yet to be applied to this day.  
 
- The Bali Ministerial Conference held in December  2013, when the principle of specific 
decisions on cotton was recognized. This mandate has not been applied to this day either.  
 
- The Nairobi Ministerial Conference held in December  2015, when a package containing a 
series of measures was adopted. This led to high hopes, all of which were shattered at the 
Eleventh Ministerial Conference which took place i n Buenos Aires in December  2017.  
 
In other words, ladies and gentlemen, since Cancún 2003 – 18 years ago – an issue recognized as 
urgent and vital has been placed on the WTO's negotiating agenda with a view to finding appropriate 
and correspondingly urgent  solutions as rapidly as possible. Some Members could barely be bothered 
to react to the plea and distress call from the cotton producing and exporting communities in the 
least-developed countries, especially African countries.  
 
This is the current situation despite the energy of African leaders, civil society and farmers' 
associations in various forums around the world, and despite all the sound reasons that make the 
case for African cotton.  
 
Why do we set such great store by our cotton? In the whol e of Africa, cotton accounts for close to 
12% of GDP and 70 % of agricultural revenue. The sector also employs over 80 % of the active 
population in cotton zones. All in all, 65 % of African countries produce and export cotton, as do 
other developing and leas t-developed countries in Asia, Latin America and the Caribbean.  
 
This African cotton, despite the intrinsic properties of its fibre, faces strong competition due 
especially to the domestic support – estimated at USD  5.9 billion - that certain rich countries granted 
their producers in 2019 -2020.  
 
As for my country, Mali,  I reiterate that  some four  million people depend directly on cotton 
production for their livelihood. This white gold accounts for 11.3 % of our export revenue and 
3.7% of GDP. In other words, cotton is a strategic product for our economy. It is a commodity , a 
generator of growth and a provider of jobs and revenue that is able to help our countries fight 
poverty more effectively, particularly in rural areas and within disadvantaged communities.  
 
We cannot discuss cotton without evoking our farmers and their bareness, farmers who often do not 
have decent living conditions between cotton campaigns. We must also evoke the chores of female 
farmers, who will not know the empowerment advocated by international forums for as long as the 
subsidies persist. We also ev oke, with concern, the future of the children, for whom education is 
becoming a luxury because of the scarce means of their farmer parents.  
 
We keep talking about African cotton to underline the strenuous work involved in growing this crop. 
To illustrate t he daily lives of our cotton growers, picture the courageous women, men and elderly 
people who relentlessly plant by hand – I repeat, by hand – cotton fields in vast plains; who manually 
tend to cotton plants from dawn to dusk, in the rain, under the burni ng sun, in windy weather and 
during tropical storms; and who also hand -pick the cotton, boll after boll, carefully, relentlessly.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 121 - 
 
  These men and women are waiting for you, ladies and gentlemen. Not only are they submitted to 
this injustice, apparent to all , of the subsidies paid to their competitors, but they are endlessly 
exposed to the instability of international market prices, the negative impacts of climate change and 
the unexpected and devastating consequences of the COVID -19 pandemic.  
 
We have high h opes that the WTO Members will seize the opportunity of the Twelfth Ministerial 
Conference next month to finally give a fair and appropriate response to the Hong Kong mandate of 
December  2005 on cotton, and specifically on the third pillar of the negotiati ons, on "domestic 
support".  
 
You will remember that, regarding the three agriculture pillars under negotiation you, the 
WTO Members, decided on 19  December  2015, in Nairobi, to provide "duty -free and quota -free 
market access for cotton and cotton -related p roducts originating from LDCs" as from 
1 January  2016.  
 
The commitment, certainly laudable, was then to contribute to formulating "multidimensional and 
integrated" programmes and projects at the regional and subregional level, participating in the 
promotio n of the cotton sector in the LDCs.  
 
Solutions and answers to the thorny issue of cotton should enable the LDC producers and exporters 
to turn trade into a proper tool in the fight against poverty and in favour of sustainable development.  
 
This is, without  a doubt, the best way of translating paragraph  24 of the 
Nairobi  Ministerial  Declaration into action in order to facilitate the integration of the LDCs into the 
multilateral trading system.  
 
It is now time to be bold, bold about keeping promises and bold about consolidating universal efforts 
to attain the 17 Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) by 2030, fleshing out the commitments 
entered into freely in 2005 in favour of cotton in our countries.  
 
You should renew and keep these commitments because even today, and notwithstanding all of the 
C4's efforts, more than 70 % of cotton production receives domestic support, granted mainly by the 
developed countries and the developing countries of the WTO. This practice results in cotton price 
distortions ever y bit as much as export subsidies or any other such trade practice.  
 
We, the C4 countries, are not asking on behalf of ourselves and of all the LDC producers and 
exporters of cotton, for charity or for any particular favour. All we are asking for is the ap plication 
of international trade rules, which allow all the stakeholders of the cotton sector to earn their rightful 
share, regardless of country of origin. Simply their rightful share. We are asking that you breathe 
new life and hope into the cotton secto r, which is dying a slow death in the LDCs.  
 
I repeat, the subsidies that certain States grant their producers are killing the rules. You are all 
aware of this.  
 
Would not the most generous development assistance that we could receive be that you respect, in 
a fully transparent manner these rules and principles which have already been defined, so that our 
populations can derive a decent and dignified living from their labours, as everyone is entitled to?  
 
If we are not careful, in a not -so-distant future,  thousands of our producers will be forced to abandon 
cotton production because of persistent inequality in international trade, as it will not seem 
sufficiently profitable in the long term.  
 
Need I remind you that in Mali, before this year's expect ed rebound, the farmers had recently 
decided, with a heavy heart, to defer cotton cultivation and replace it by other crops, such as cereals?  
 
I wish to pay tribute here today to the resilience of our farmers, especially our cotton growers.  
 
Despite their difficult working conditions and the bottlenecks that I described earlier, farmers carry 
with all their might the fragile growth of our economies. The Malian cotton producers that I met 
during my first visit throughout my country last August have promised record cotton production at 
the end of the current crop year. Can you imagine their performance and macroeconomic 
implications if international trade were fairer and more attractive?  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 122 - 
 
   
It is our responsibility to build genuine cotton value chains that are p rofitable to agriculture in 
general, across crops and productions. For that matter, the policy on the balanced development of 
the primary sector, set out by the Government of Mali, points in that direction.  
 
Mali is an agro -sylvo-pastoral country. It is a rural country which aims to become an agricultural 
power in West Africa by drawing on its water potential, its available arable land and its favourable 
climate. To succeed however, we must mitigate constraints due to climate change, address the 
security cr isis, but also tackle the challenges resulting from subsidies.  
 
I would like to conclude by reiterating our strong call for the immediate reaction of all the 
WTO Members in order to implement tangible solutions within the ongoing negotiating process, to 
preserve and promote our cotton sectors, of which the strategic importance is abundantly clear.  
 
I would like to especially urge you, at the Twelfth Ministerial Conference, to support and adopt the 
draft Ministerial Decision prepared and submitted by the C4 countries.  
 
A significant outcome in the current negotiations on domestic support for cotton would then be a 
strong signal and great accomplishment of the Twelfth Ministerial Conference, which will have 
reached its goals by planting the seeds of moral obli gation supported by this year's 
World  Cotton  Day. 
 
On behalf of all the cotton producers in Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali, Chad, and the LDCs, I thank you 
for your kind attention.  
 
 
_______________  
  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 123 - 
 
  STATEMENT BY H.E. HAROUNA KABORE, MINISTER OF COMMERCE, INDUSTRY AND 
HANDICRAFTS OF BURKINA FASO  
 
I am making this statement on behalf of the group of four co -sponsors of the Sectoral Initiative in 
Favour of Cotton (C4) and the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire, and all 36 African countries that produce 
and/o r export cotton and cotton by -products.  
 
This meeting of the General Council is taking place in a special context for the C4 countries and 
other cotton -producing countries around the world.  
 
On 30  August  2021, the United Nations General Assembly adopted by  consensus a resolution 
(A/RES/75/318) proclaiming 7  October as World Cotton Day. This marked the end of a process that 
began in 2019 at the initiative of the C4 Group, with the support of all its partners.  
 
As it is 7  October  2021, an important date for c otton, I would like to take this opportunity to thank 
all Members for their support in adopting this resolution and you, Mr  Chair, as well as the Chair of 
the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session and the Director -General of the 
World  Trade  Organizat ion (WTO), for your tireless efforts for the cotton cause.  
 
I would also like to thank the International Trade Centre (ITC), the United Nations Conference on 
Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the International Cotton Advisory Committee (ICAC), the Food 
and A griculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) and all the agencies involved in organizing 
activities to celebrate this day.  
 
The vital importance of the cotton issue for the economies and populations of cotton -producing and 
exporting African countrie s and, in particular, least -developed countries (LDCs), is widely 
recognized.  
 
The cotton sector plays a crucial role in achieving the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), 
particularly in the fight against poverty, and contributes substantially to food se curity in 
cotton -producing and exporting African countries and LDCs. It also contributes to the economic 
empowerment of women and young people in both rural and urban areas.  
 
However, it should be noted that domestic support continues to seriously disrupt world cotton prices 
and that one of the main consequences of this disruption is the significant loss of income suffered 
by millions of people in cotton -producing and exporting African countries and LDCs. These problems 
are exacerbated by the effects of the  COVID -19 pandemic on the cotton sector and the security 
crisis in some C4 countries.  
 
Consequently, the C4 countries reaffirm their concerns at the lack of substantial outcomes in the 
multilateral trade negotiations on domestic support for cotton, despite  the mandate issued in 
December  2005 in Hong Kong.  
 
The C4 reiterates the pressing demand of several countries that produce and export cotton and 
cotton -related products to reach a concrete and fair agreement with a view to eliminating the 
distorting effec ts of all forms of support for the cotton sector.  
 
Furthermore, the C4 urgently calls upon all WTO Members granting domestic support with 
trade -distorting effects on the international cotton market to strive for further progress in the work 
on cotton and t o notify, on a regular basis and to ensure transparency, up -to-date information on 
the domestic support granted to their cotton producers, in order to effectively meet the objectives 
set for this vital issue.  
 
The C4 expresses its gratitude to the South -South, North -South, bilateral, regional and multilateral 
development partners for their support for capacity -building activities with respect to the production, 
processing and exportation of cotton and cotton by -products in African countries, in LDCs  and, in 
particular, in the C4 countries.  
 
The C4 re -extends the invitation to all the development partners to contribute to the implementation 
of the integrative and regional programme, most notably the "Cotton Roadmap" programme, so as 
to ensure the deve lopment of value chains in the cotton sector in the beneficiary countries, with a WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 124 - 
 
  view to making this sector a true instrument for creating jobs, combating poverty and improving 
food security, and for sustainable and inclusive economic and social developme nt. 
 
The C4 remains committed to concluding the Doha Round of negotiations, taking account of the 
legitimate concerns of developing countries and, in particular, those of LDCs, which include several 
African countries, notably the C4.  
 
The C4 reaffirms its willingness to continue discussions on reforms in the cotton sector and its 
support for the preservation of the multilateral trading system based on WTO rules.  
 
Before I conclude, I would like to cordially invite you to take part in the third International  Cotton 
and Textile Fair (SICOT), set to be held on 27 and 28  January  2022 in Koudougou, Burkina Faso. It 
will be a real forum for discussion and reflection on the issues and opportunities in the development 
of the African cotton value chain.  
 
____________ ___ 
 
 
  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 125 - 
 
  STATEMENT BY THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL DR. NGOZI OKONJO -IWEALA  
Thank you, Chairman. Your Excellency Choguel Kokalla Maïga , Prime Minister of the Republic of Mali 
and the Mali delegation, your Excellency Harouna Kabore , Minister of Industry, Trade and Ha ndicrafts 
of Burkina Faso and Burkina delegation, I would like to thank you for your presence amongst us 
today, and also for your comments which remind us why cotton is so important, and how the WTO 
can contribute to improving both the lives and livelihood s of millions of individuals in your countries 
and elsewhere. First of all , I would like to congratulate you Mali, Burkina Faso, Chad, Benin and Cote 
d'Ivoire on the adoption by the United Nations General Assembly of a Resolution that you proposed 
which officially recognizes the 7 October , as you said , as World Cotton Day.  
For me  as an African woman and a consumer of cotton I am very happy about that. This Resolution 
highlights the fact that cotton is more than a simple textile or fibre that is used to make our clothes. 
Cotton and its by -products are processed, transformed, and tr aded everywhere. Cotton is grown in 
over 75 countries across five continents. The livelihoods of over 100 million people are linked to the 
sector. In many least developed countries, cotton is central to job creation and economic stability. 
The COVID -19 pan demic had an impact on every sector of the global economy, and the cotton sector 
is no exception. The pandemic has led to the most accelerated slump in cotton prices since many 
years. In a forthcoming study undertaken by the WTO Secretariat at the request of the C -4 countries 
and other LDCs, it is noted that GDP per capita of a group of ten LDC cotton -producing countries 
has decreased by 2.1% on average, while indicators of food security have also decreased. The value 
of cotton exports has fallen by 34% for  the group as a whole, whilst some countries have been able 
to maintain or even increase exports. Climate change is an ongoing threat to cotton production and 
to agriculture in general. The study contains recommendations on the possible measures which will  
promote recovery and resilience in the cotton sector.  
Many of you may recall that the first World Cotton Day was celebrated here in the WTO in 2019. 
Today is a day for us to recognize all the women and men who derive their livelihoods from cotton 
producti on, processing, transformation and commercialization.  
The Prime Minister has talked about the cotton farmers in many countries . We also recognize the 
role that can be played by an improvement in multilateral trade rules and aid for development , in 
order t o increase revenues and help the cotton sector to achieve its development goals. We heard 
the words of both the Prime Minister of Mali and the Minister of Burkina  Faso. I would like to pay 
tribute to the C -4 countries for the tireless efforts that they hav e deployed to ensure that cotton 
plays a primordial role in the negotiating agenda of the WTO, starting with the sectoral initiative 
launched in 2003.  
Cotton remains , I think , a real window into the readiness of Members to obtain development -based 
results , especially those in favour of LDCs.  
We have been able to take significant measures, eliminating export subsidies and equivalent 
measures for cotton. We have also been able to reaffirm the commitment to grant duty - and quota -
free market access to LDC exp orts of cotton and cotton -related agricultural products, establishing a 
specific process for transparency and follow up in order to look at new facts related to trade in 
cotton. In 2017, the WTO , together with the International Trade Centre , launched the C otton Portal 
- a single -entry point for cotton -specific information on market access, trade statistics, business 
contacts and development assistance. This portal responds to the reality that information is essential 
for businesses to trade. Looking ahead, we need to ensure that cotton discussions at the WTO remain 
on the right track.  
I note the expectations of the C -4 for an outcome at MC12. Given the current context in the 
negotiations , everybody is going to have to demonstrate pragmatism and a sense of co mpromise to 
ensure that we achieve progress on cotton at MC12 and beyond. Let us continue to work together 
to ensure that the trading system can provide an outcome for those who are working in the cotton 
sector. Long live cotton, long live World Cotton Day, thank you to all of you.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 126 - 
 
  ANNEX 2 
STATEMENT S BY THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL, THE CHAIR OF THE GENERAL COUNCIL AND 
THE CHAIRS OF THE NEGOTIATING GROUPS AT THE INFORMAL TNC AND INFORMAL 
HODS MEETINGS HELD ON 30 SEPTEMBER  2021  
_______________  
 
 
STATEMENT BY THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL DR. NGOZI OKONJO -IWEALA  
 
 
Introduction  
Good morning everyone. Welcome to this Informal TNC/HODs meeting. This is the first opportunity 
after the summer break for Heads of Delegation to collectively re -engage on the range of substantive 
issues that you have been work ing on across different negotiating bodies and in the other work 
amongst Members.  
As I noted in the convening notice for this meeting, you heeded to the call by the GC Chair and I in 
July for early re -engagement after the break. I just want to thank all of  you for this. Your efforts are 
remarkable. I thank you for your commitment. And thanks to the GC Chair as well.  
In light of this, I decided to convene our meeting today – at the end of September, in recognition of 
the many meetings, Chairs' consultations and outreach efforts – which are all important avenues to 
further narrow gaps and build convergence. Based on all these activities, delegations should be 
better positioned today to reflect on where we are and what needs to be done, in this final stage of 
our preparations for MC12.  
As you will have observed – this meeting takes place during the Public Forum. The Public Forum is 
a WTO tradition and this edition is my first one as Director -General. I know that in this context, 
some of you have raised concerns about the disruptions this week's events have caused to your 
work including availability of meeting rooms at the WTO. This longstanding event was long planned, 
as you know, even before I took office. And it involves so many of our stakeholders. Whilst we 
thought about it, it would be so difficult to disrupt in order to avoid their disappointment. I must tell 
you that I have mingled with so many of the participants now. I met them and their level of interest 
and enthusiasm is quite high.  
I think that since w e have stakeholders still willing to come to the WTO to engage with us, this is 
quite important. It is testament not only of their interest in what we are doing, but also a reminder 
that we have a responsibility to deliver for ordinary people. It is import ant to keep our stakeholders 
engaged – especially during these difficult times. And the other thing I am glad about is that many 
Ambassadors and delegates are involved in the sessions either in panels or participating in them.  
Delivering for people – creati ng jobs, raising living standards, promoting sustainability – is especially 
important in these difficult times. As COVID -19 continues to have a devastating impact on lives and 
livelihoods, the global economy is on a K -shaped trajectory of recovery. Advance d economies and a 
handful of emerging markets with abundant vaccine supplies and the requisite fiscal space are 
recovering strongly, but the rest of the world is lagging behind. The IMF projects 6% growth in global 
GDP, but only 3.9% growth in low -income d eveloping countries, and 3.4% growth in sub -Saharan 
Africa, the region where vaccine inequity is most acute. Our own data shows similar divergence 
across regions in trade performance – there is a strong resurgence of trade – with Africa, South 
America, and  the Middle East recovering more slowly than other regions. We will discuss these issues 
in-depth when we issue the WTO's new trade forecast next week.  
As you all know, many of the countries grappling with slow growth and trade recovery also have 
substant ial debt burdens that have not been successfully dealt with yet, notwithstanding the efforts 
being made by our sister institutions – the IMF, the World Bank – and the international community 
particularly the G -20. This is further weighing on the little fis cal space that these low-income  
countries have to stimulate recovery. This is something we should bear in mind as we negotiate – 
trade can help give them the support they need to help their economies rebound. I thought I should WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 127 - 
 
  share this context with you because trade is part and parcel of a sustainable economic recovery and 
we must think of how we can be part of a successful and sustainable recovery for those countries 
that do not have the means. A successful MC12 would send a strong signal that WTO Membe rs are 
committed to working together to make trade part of the solution for a lasting and inclusive global 
economic recovery. Again, I urge you to bear this in mind in all of your negotiating processes in view 
of MC12.  
Reports by Negotiating Group Chairs  
 
With these introductory remarks, let me now turn to the reports of Negotiating Group Chairs. To 
prepare for this meeting, on Monday, I met with the Chairs. The GC Chair was also present. We 
exchanged views on their efforts to assist you in advancing work across various negotiating areas.  
As you are well aware, since our last informal TNC on 23 July – there has been active engagement 
in the fisheries subsidies and agriculture negotiations – two areas that many of you have repeatedly 
expressed a desire to ac hieve results before or at MC12. On fisheries subsidies, Ministers provided 
the needed political momentum at the 15 July Ministerial TNC. Ministers are expecting results from 
us soon – which is why Ambassador Wills has intensified efforts aimed at assistin g you get to the 
finishing line.  
In agriculture, the Chair – Ambassador Gloria Abraham Peralta issued a negotiating text under her 
own responsibility on 29 July and discussions have also intensified. There have also been activities 
in various configuratio ns including open -ended meetings convened by the Chair of the  
CTD SS – Ambassador Kadra Ahmed Hassan and of the CTS SS – Ambassador Zhanar Aitzhanova.  
 Let me therefore invite the Chairs to update Members on the latest developments in their respective 
negotiating areas, including their assessment of what is needed to close remaining gaps in order to 
deliver results by MC12.  
I would like to invite the Negotiating Group Chairs to take the floor as follows14: 
Ambassador Gloria Abraham Peralta (Costa Rica) – Committee on Agriculture in Special 
Session.  
Ambassador Kadra Ahmed Hassan (Djibouti) – Committee on Trade and Development in 
Special Session.  
Ambassador Zhanar Aitzhanova (Kazakhstan) – Council for Trade in Services in Special 
Session.  
Ambassador  Santiago Wills (Colombia) – Negotiating Group on Rules.  
Listening to all of the reports, they are all very sobering. But I sincerely hope that what you said 
that people are looking for a win -win solution is the truth. I hope that is the mindset in which w e 
are all approaching these negotiations. If it is not, then we have a problem. With that said, let me 
sincerely thank the Chairs for their dedication, commitment, and hard work. When I think about it, 
the Chairs of these Negotiating Bodies are peers who a re doing this work voluntarily. I joked that 
they are not being paid for it. They also have other duties to pursue. So we have to give them the 
utmost respect for giving us their time to try to lead all of us through this process. So I really want 
to remin d all Members of this. I do not think any of them has an axe to grind or wants to take 
negotiations in one particular direction or another. They are there trying to do their best to get us 
an outcome and I would like us to respect and cherish them. That is  how I see them. Thank you so 
much.  
I want to note the sheer number of ideas, papers, and submissions since I came back from my trip 
I have been going through that individual Members and groups have tabled in various areas.  On the 
one hand, this is encour aging because this means there is a lot of active engagement. On the other 
 
14 The reports of the Chairs of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session, Committee on Trade and 
Development in Special Session, Council for Trade i n Services in Special Session and the Negotiating Group on 
Rules can be found in the Annex of this document.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 128 - 
 
  hand, sometimes with so many new, sometimes conflicting ideas and sometimes old ideas that have 
been debated and left behind coming back again, it can look confusing. It is clear th at things are not 
moving at the pace that we want them to move, but often times we find it is darkest before the 
dawn. So, we still need to persevere.  
And as you have heard from the Chairs, it is really crunch time. A lot remains to be done, divergences 
are deep – let us not deceive ourselves, and the time to MC12 is limited. The inevitable consequences 
of the situation we find ourselves in today will be increased demands on all delegations and potential 
conflicting schedules. On the latter, the Secretaria t is really trying to the extent possible, to avoid 
scheduling conflicts. We have in particular the concerns of smaller delegations in mind and remain 
cautious about their constraints.   
But at the same time , I would like to encourage all of you to follow w hat the Chairs have suggested 
– talking to each other bilaterally, in small groups, in addition to the meetings that have been 
converged by the Chairs. I would urge you to feel free at any time, if you want to meet alone outside 
those groups, to do so. At the same time, delegations will recall that I have been advocating for 
focused engagement on a few – 2 or 3 deliverables and addressing other equally important issues – 
and I want to stress these equally important issues – after the Ministerial in a more f ocused manner. 
Some exciting work is going on in the various areas and I hope we can find a way to take these 
forward. But I think we need to devote a lot of time and energy to make sure that we have those 
two or three deliverables that we can talk about a nd present at MC12. So let me reiterate this call 
for focus and ask you to bear this in mind as you take the floor.  
Assessment by the TNC Chairperson  
 
Let me now provide my assessment as TNC Chair and perhaps make some suggestions and 
observations as I go  along. I want to apologize at the onset as I will be speaking at length but please 
bear with me. I want to use this as the occasion to also report to you of the activities that have 
taken place since our TNC on 23 July. I would like to provide a full repo rt given the critical stage 
that we are in our MC12 preparatory phase. So please bear with me.  
Fisheries Subsidies  
 
 I will start with the fisheries subsidies negotiations and immediately endorse Ambassador Wills' call 
for a solution -oriented focus to the work in the Negotiating Group. I know these meetings are tough , 
but I fully support the continuous intensive process that he is leading aimed at addressing large 
macro issues and perceived imbalances in the text this remaining week to ten days that we have  for 
that before moving to line -by-line negotiations. I really want to urge you all to remain constructively 
engaged. I have looked at all the submissions on fisheries subsidies. If we throw all these in, in the 
form they are, I believe it would be impossi ble to move forward or to negotiate. I would strongly 
urge delegations and Ambassadors to again talk to each other so you can converge a little more to 
make line -by-line negotiations a real and manageable process for fisheries.  
On how we get from where we are to where we need to be, we heard from Ministers and Heads of 
Delegation in July. The ball is back in your court as Heads of Delegation in Geneva to translate their 
guidance into concrete action. I heard the call that, yes, we need to balance the text. But, yes, we 
need to come to a conclusion. And I understand that differences on perspectives of the possible 
disciplines remain. But it is also evident that the mood and the spirit in these negotiations is 
cooperative, notwithstanding the amount of work th at needs to be done. I really want to urge you 
to continue this cooperative and constructive approach by trying to converge various proposals that 
you have put on the table. Just bear in mind, if you look at all of them, you can see that it would be 
imposs ible to engage on that basis. So we need to do something to solve this problem and produce 
a text that can actually be negotiated.  
We all know what is at stake for millions of people whose livelihoods depend on sustainable fishing. 
"This is for people – not for fish". But this is also for sustainability and biodiversity of our oceans. 
Let me say that the time is here for us to conclude a balanced and meaningful fisheries agreement. 
After 21 years of no results, it is clear that if we do not pull it off now , then I don't really see what 
factor can help us pull it off later. Despite the fact that Members have different views, and the 
negotiations are technically as well as politically complicated, we can still make it by presenting a 
constructive attitude tow ards each other. We have to accept that now is the time to put our cards 
on the table if we want to move things.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 129 - 
 
  I want to use an analogy so please permit me. In my part of the world, we go to open markets to 
buy our goods. And when you go to buy, you kno w you are going into a negotiating process between 
the person selling and the person buying. From the time you are small, when you are eight or nine 
years old, your mother starts taking you to the market. It is the mothers who usually do a lot of the 
buyin g. They want to teach you how to do this thing , so you start early. It is a fine art. The person 
selling the goods knows that if they move a little too far with what they are demanding, the customer 
will walk away because they will say it is not even worth  my while trying to negotiate this. The 
customer knows that if they demand that the price be lowered a little too much, the seller will just 
turn their back and focus on the next customer. It is a fine game. You have to know at what point 
you can still eng age the person you are negotiating with and at what point they will say, "This is so 
far out I am not even going to try." That is what we are in and that is why you are taken when you 
are small to be taught how to do this because it is something you have t o learn so you do not go 
too far this way or too far the other way.  
As I look at the negotiations we are doing here, this comes to mind. Are we really trying to put 
demands that we know are so far out that other colleagues would walk out and not even want  to 
talk about it? Are we going to try a balance where we are demanding something , but it is still 
reasonable that other Members want to talk to us? This is what I want to put on the table. It is an 
art. It is not a science. It is an art. And we have to le arn that balance. One way this way, it does not 
work. One way the other way, it doesn't. As far as I can see - again, I have been here for six months 
– it has not worked because that balance has not been observed or respected by the negotiators. 
Unless we change our mind and learn this balance, we are not going to move. And that is the plea I 
am really making. Do not, at this time, think that you can throw out a really out of the way demand 
as a negotiating position because other delegations who are being i nterested in striking a deal will 
look at this and say, "Well, this is so far out. Why am I even in this room?" And they will walk out. 
And that is not what we really want. So, I am pleading to all of you to take a reasonable approach 
to the fisheries nego tiations. For the first time, we stand a chance. We have the will of Leaders – 
and I would talk about it more later. Let us not in Geneva disappoint them, please.  
All I want to repeat is that when we are talking about fisheries, it is about people. When I was 
learning fisheries, it is part of agriculture. We cannot say that when we look at agriculture that it is 
not about crops and people. I just want to remind everybody that the fisheries negotiations is 
squarely about the livelihoods of people. It is also  about the sustainability of our oceans and of 
biodiversity. But all in all, these two things complement and reinforce each other and that is what 
we need to put ahead of us as we negotiate.  
Agriculture  
 
On agriculture, Ambassador Abraham Peralta has provi ded a draft text under her own responsibility 
to try and move these negotiations forward. Several meetings and consultations in various formats 
have since been held. You have heard what she said. Members have tabled further contributions. 
So, there has bee n enormous effort reflective of the sentiments by many of you in equating a 
successful MC12 to delivering meaningful outcomes on agriculture. For a negotiating portfolio that 
dates back even further than fisheries subsidies, it is high time we try to come to focus. The chance 
is there. Perhaps we cannot deliver all that everybody wants. But I think we can get something out 
of this. But I urge us to think in those constructive terms.  
I am not surprised that in several discussions, including on the occasion of my participation in the 
LDC retreat in Montreux as well as the G -33 Ministerial Meeting chaired by H.E. Mr. Muhammad 
Lutfi, Minister for Trade of Indonesia, I heard a strong push to deliver an outcome in agriculture – 
the same thing when I attended the meeting of the Cairns Group. We have to look at this within the 
context of the implications of the COVID -19 pandemic on food and livelihood security.  
Recent estimates by both the World Bank and the IMF show that low-income  countries were 
particularly hard hit by the pandemic, with little fiscal space to respond. I have shared the numbers 
with you earlier and I have told you about the K -shaped recovery. But what this means is that we 
have to be particularly cognizant of issues like food security and livelihood as part of the response 
to the pandemic for these countries.  
I know many expressed discomfort with the Chair's text, but I think that the circulati on of the text 
constitutes a significant step forward in the negotiations. As stressed by Gloria, this text is primarily 
a tool to help you engage in text -based negotiations and build your compromise text. I hope the WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 130 - 
 
  text is serving this purpose. And I am looking forward to seeing what kind of package, including post 
MC12, we can put together for agriculture.  
It is now time to crack the nut for agriculture – be it for domestic support or public stockholding. To 
help the Chair move on this, we have to demon strate the necessary flexibility. We have to engage 
with each other towards a middle ground. I know agriculture is important to all – whether it be these 
issues I have mentioned, public stockholding, domestic support, market access and cotton with 
Cotton D ay coming on 7 October. I want us all to remember that agriculture is an existential issue 
for all of us but especially for our poorer non -industrialized Members. Agreeing on a balanced 
approach at MC12 is critical for the future of our Members and for the  future of these negotiations.  
The United Nations Food Systems Summit that took place a week ago and the United Nations climate 
conference that will start on 1 November remind us of the urgent need, notably in the context of the 
COVID -19 crisis, to get bac k on track and to move toward a fairer and more sustainable agricultural 
and food systems that effectively contribute to the fight against poverty and malnutrition.  
The multilateral trading system is part of the solution and it is our collective responsibi lity to ensure 
the WTO effectively plays its role in this global effort. We must send the right signal to the world at 
MC12 with a meaningful, forward -looking agricultural package. If we cannot get all of it done now, 
let us agree on how we get it done pos t MC12.  
Special and Differential Treatment  
 
The negotiation on special and differential treatment is another difficult yet important area for all 
delegations. Listening to interventions at the July General Council, I felt that delegations 
acknowledge that S&DT is a key part of the WTO's architecture for assisting developing countries, 
especially LDCs, integrate fully into the multilateral trading system.  
S&DT remains a central tenet of the WTO and the issues around it can only be solved by dialogue 
and flexibility. I was encouraged to see that dialogue begin at the last formal General Council. 
Members talking to and not at each other. I know the G90 have issued a recent submission and you 
have heard Ambassador Hassan's report today which was  not promising. She is holding consultations 
in different formats to find a way to move forward. Again, I urge, let us try to find some common 
ground among these proposals. Let us aim for a positive, even if partial, move on these issues and 
see what we ca n do post MC12 to continue to evolve on this.  
LDC Matters and Development  
 
Let me also mention that I had very useful discussions on LDC issues with a number of Ministers 
from Bangladesh, Sierra Leone and The Gambia – as well as the UN USG of the UN OHR fo r LDCs, 
LLDCs and SIDS. We discussed a range of issues of importance to LDCs including the urgent need 
to focus on recovery and resilience efforts from the pandemic given that LDCs are most 
disproportionately impacted as I noted earlier. I hope we can make  progress on outstanding LDC 
issues through necessary flexibility on all sides and a willingness to approach issues with realism.  
I thought the recent South -South Dialogue on LDCs and development in Montreux was useful and 
in this regard, I would like to thank and applaud the LDC Group Coordinator – Ambassador Makaila 
of Chad who made an extremely good presentation and thank Ambassador Li of China for putting 
this together aimed at facilitating a process of finding solutions to the concerns raised by LDCs and 
LLDCs as we prepare for MC12.   
I would like to mention that the study being done by the Secretariat on LLDC issues, particularly 
with respect to logistical bottlenecks during emergencies such as the pandemic, is coming along 
nicely – and I hope we have  it ready as a basis to also look at LLDC issues prior to MC12.  
The importance of addressing developmental challenges through WTO work was a recurring theme 
in my discussions with up to seven Presidents and Prime Ministers I met with in New York. This is 
really appreciated on the part of the WTO as we talk on the side -lines of the UN General Assembly 
last week.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 131 - 
 
  Services  
 
Turning to services, to state the obvious, services trade has greatly increased in importance over 
the past years and is a key driver of g rowth and development.  The pandemic has had a strong 
adverse impact in this area, but I believe that services will rebound with the recovery. Yesterday, I 
received ten members of the Services Associations and we all agreed that services is the future of 
trade and the WTO cannot be left behind.  
As I understand it, MC12 is not about re -launching the services negotiations as 
Ambassador  Aitzhanova said, under the built -in agenda. But silence would seem odd.  I encourage 
delegations to continue their discussions  to see what signal can be conveyed by Ministers at MC12 
so as to provide some impetus for discussions after the Ministerial on matters under the purview of 
the Special Session.   
Negotiations in general  
 
Overall, on the negotiations, delegations have been actively engaged in various strands of our 
negotiating work – but it is also evident from the Chairs' reports today that we are not making the 
progress we should in these areas. When we have some Ambassadors saying that we are 
retrogressing rather than pro gressing, or members of the media claiming Ambassadors are telling 
them MC12 will not work, then we really need to step back and take a look at where we are.  
This is not the impression I get from talking to Ministers and Leaders outside. So, I do not know 
whether there is a Geneva bubble where we feel that things will not work. But I would like us to step 
back and really ask ourselves if we want to deliver, if we want to continue what we have been doing 
for twenty years. Personally, I do not share this pess imistic assessment as yet – as yet. I think we 
should target our energies to make the final push as I have said before but maybe the time will 
come when we need to step and say, "Do we really want this MC12 or not?" We need to ask ourselves 
that. Sometimes  I feel like some of us do not want a successful MC12. And I do not say this lightly.  
So, for the remaining time, we should keep asking ourselves if we want to have a successful MC12. 
If we do not, let us be honest and tell the world that we don't. Let us not pretend. Let us tell our 
Ministers we cannot make it. Ministers have not met in person for the past four years. If we want 
them to be successful, then I think we have very little time to change the way we approach this.  
The WTO's Pandemic Response  
 
Let me now turn to the WTO's response to the pandemic. This remains an absolute priority for 
everyone, and a vital imperative for ongoing coordination both within and beyond the WTO.  I was 
unable to attend last week's Informal General Council meeting when Ambassador Walker reported 
on his work as Facilitator. Therefore, I will start by thanking David for the indispensable work he is 
undertaking on the WTO's response to the pandemic.  
I would also like to thank Ambassador Dagfinn Sørli for his efforts as Cha irman of the TRIPS Council 
and, of course, Ambassador Dacio Castillo, our General Council Chair for his unwavering and 
unrelenting effort to guide us in this process. While working through complex and sensitive issues, 
I have been most encouraged by the se riousness, engagement and commitment to an effective 
global response that are widely shared across the Membership.  
We need urgently to build on this sense of common purpose. It is clear that to achieve a successful 
outcome from MC12 – and still more import antly to overcome the dreadful social and economic 
havoc wrought by the pandemic – requires us to converge on the key elements of a meaningful 
response to the pandemic. The WTO must do its part in the international response – as others have 
already – and c ontribute not only to addressing the pandemic and its multidimensional challenges, 
but also in giving effect to the hard -won practical lessons and proceed to lay down the necessary 
preparations for future pandemics. In this regard, though text -based negoti ations on IP are stuck, 
it appears that there might be promising discussions currently ongoing between Members on how to 
break the impasse. I want to thank those Members who are aiming to do this and strongly encourage 
them to persevere. We cannot get to a  response on the pandemic without tackling and finding a 
compromise solution on IP.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 132 - 
 
  Moving on, I have continued my outreach efforts with the Multilateral Leaders Task Force on 
COVID -19 Vaccines, Therapeutics and Diagnostics working with the Heads of the I MF, World Bank 
and WHO and with a wide range of stakeholders. The initial focus has been on finding solutions to 
overcome obstacles to ramping up and diversifying vaccine production, with the express goal of 
redressing the shocking global inequity in acces s to vaccines, which is imposing the social and 
economic costs of the pandemic on those who are least able to absorb them. This outreach 
complements the excellent work underway by Secretariat staff, at a very granular level, working 
with staff of the pharm aceutical companies on supply chain bottlenecks.  
In the first week of September, the Multilateral Task Force met with CEOs of pharmaceutical 
companies to continue the dialogue on finding ways to resolve bottlenecks in supply chains, 
regulatory convergence and other issues related to the manufacturing and distribution of COVID -19 
vaccines. Let us recall that the G -20 Finance Ministers asked the Multilateral Task Force to try to 
work on the IMF proposal of investing USD 50 billion in order to vaccinate 40% of  the world by the 
end of this year, 60% by mid next year, 70% by the end of next year in order to get a hold on this 
pandemic.  
Our ability to interact with key players in the industry and the clarity this brings has been viewed by 
the international commun ity as a significant step towards resolving vaccine inequities. As a follow -
up at technical level, we have now also established a Vaccine Network with representatives from the 
IMF, the World Bank, WHO and WTO, together with representatives of vaccine manuf acturers to 
attain an ever clearer, more granular, and timely analysis of choke points and obstacles. This has 
confirmed that getting the trade policy settings right – which means reducing unnecessary obstacles 
on cross -border supply chains, stepping up re gulatory cooperation, and fostering technology transfer 
– taken together would make a decisive, concrete contribution to improved outcomes.  
We have also met with the African Vaccine Acquisition Trust (AVAT) and the Manufacturing Task 
Force who have also as ked our help on working with supply chains and asking how the WTO can 
support their efforts. We are now seeing encouraging progress towards diversification of production 
capacity in Africa and in Latin America – vital in responding not merely to this pande mic, but also 
ensuring sustainable capacity in these regions for the next challenges. We are intensifying our 
collaboration with COVAX and AVAT as I said.  
These are also the same messages that I delivered at the virtual White House Global COVID -19 
Summit convened last week by H.E. President Joseph Biden. My view therefore is that by addressing 
vaccine inequity, we can ensure inclusive economic recovery for all. And I trust the WTO – all of us 
– will continue to play our part in making this come into fruiti on. We are appreciative that the WTO 
was one of the few International Organizations invited to participate in the Biden COVID -19 Summit. 
It is a mark of recognition for the important work underway on monitoring of and dealing with supply 
chain bottlenecks.  
At this point, I want to share with you a letter that we received last night from two of the Senators 
we met in our trip last week in the United States – H.E. Senator Thomas Carper and H.E. Senator 
John Connor. The reason I am sharing this with you is tha t it is one of the best letters I have ever 
seen. They have sent a letter to H.E. President Joseph Biden commending the work of the WTO in 
this area on supply chains particularly the granular work we are doing with the pharmaceutical 
companies. This is the  kind of attention that we would like this organization to receive. And I would 
like to thank all those who have been instrumental in this especially the Secretariat staff.  
All these efforts should feed into the regular work of the WTO Councils and Committ ees as several 
of you have suggested in the discussions led by Ambassador Walker. As a Member -driven 
organization, all of our discussions, together with the complementary efforts of the Secretariat flow 
into the same work stream led by Members. As far as I  know, we are in this together and the 
Secretariat is and will always be at your service on these issues.  
So clearly, a lot has been happening on several broad fronts – from monitoring of export prohibitions 
and restrictions and regulatory issues to workin g with manufacturers to increase production, spur 
research and development, address supply chain issues and foster transfer of technology and know -
how to diversify production capacity across the globe.  A substantive, forward -looking and inclusive 
MC12 outc ome on pandemic response will definitively give these welcome trends enormous 
momentum.  We know that key international actors are looking to us expectantly, knowing that this WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 133 - 
 
  is not just about symbolism. It is a vitally needed practical foundation for the next round of efforts 
to put an end to the pandemic.  
What we need now is to begin to converge, so that we can have a credible response to the world 
from the trade community soon. We do not have much time left. People are dying. So I urge you to 
engage ful ly and extend all the flexibility you have so that we can deliver in this critical area of 
response to the pandemic.  
WTO Reform including Dispute Settlement  
 
WTO Reform including finding a solution to the challenges confronted in our dispute settlement 
system as well as improving the functioning of the other pillars of the WTO. This remains clearly a 
priority for many Heads of State, Ministers, Heads of Delegation and Parliamentarians that I have 
met in recent days. I have also heard the same sentiments st rongly expressed in last week's 
meetings with US congress – the House Ways and Means Committee and Senate Finance Committee. 
DDG Ellard was with me and I thank her for her great work in organizing this. For MC12 we should 
seek a common understanding of the  type of reforms we want especially for the dispute settlement 
system and agree on a process to work on this post MC12.  
Political leaders have strongly reiterated the importance of modernizing the WTO as we look to the 
future of trade and make efforts towa rds recovery from this global economic crisis. We must heed 
their call. In this regard, I am glad that the discussions are becoming more focused in the context 
of the work that the GC Chair is undertaking on the potential outcome document for MC12 – and I 
hope we can arrive at credible results that begin to respond and point in the direction that Leaders 
and stakeholders wish to see for a reformed WTO post MC12.  
Broader External Context  
 
MC12 does not take place in a vacuum. There are several challenges con fronting the world that are 
equally critical and require global solidarity and collective action. These range from increased 
poverty, global hunger, increased inequality, unemployment, socioeconomic unrest to environmental 
degradation and climate change. T hey are all part of the broader external context within which our 
Ministerial will occur, and I note that in your discussions on the MC12 outcome document – under 
the GC Chair's process, that some of these issues are really coming to the fore.   
Today I wou ld like to address the question of climate change and related sustainability issues which 
are serious looming challenges for the global commons – accelerating as we battle the COVID -19 
pandemic. As we rightly focus efforts on concluding balanced fisheries subsidies disciplines – we 
must not forget about our responsibility to safeguard and protect our planet for future generations. 
As you are well aware, when the WTO was established, Members enshrined in the preamble of the 
Marrakesh Agreement that trade sho uld be conducted in a way that would allow "for the optimal use 
of the world's resources in accordance with the objective of sustainable development, seeking both 
to protect and preserve the environment […]".  
It is with this in mind that I have participate d recently in several events to see how best the WTO 
can continue to contribute to ongoing discussions in this field. I was invited to the Global Centre on 
Adaptation (GCA) – the launch of it – chaired by former UN SG Ban Ki Moon where we focused on 
findin g ways to address the climate crisis including how trade could be part of the solution. UNFCC 
SG Patricia Espinosa was there as well. The GCA has invited the WTO to work as a partner towards 
the COP26 Adaptation Day – setting out how trade and the WTO can contribute to delivering net 
zero in 2050. I am sure that this is a piece of work the Committee on Trade and Environment will 
find most interesting to look at.  
I was also invited to a meeting in Evian earlier this month that brought together senior busines s and 
political leaders from France and Germany where important issues to the business community were 
discussed. In fact, we have recently had meetings with several business groups, the International 
Chamber of Commerce, Coalition of Services Industries, U S Chamber of Commerce, B20 and 
Keidanren, among others. All have raised issues of climate change and the fragmented global 
approach to carbon pricing. They have also raised issues related to geopolitical tensions and 
competitive neutrality both on the dome stic support side, as well as the industrial subsidy side. 
Reforming the dispute settlement system is of particular importance to them, as is services and WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 134 - 
 
  digital trade. There is a strong desire for greater contact and partnership with the WTO. I should 
mention that this is also the case with Civil Society , and I think the WTO Membership and Secretariat 
should be gratified by this and do more to enhance this.  
MC12 Organization  
 
Finally, let me address the issue of the organization of MC12 and how I see wor k ahead. I will also 
make a few comments on a potential outcome document for MC12. On MC12 preparations, the GC 
Chair and I met with the MC12 Chair, H.E. Minister Bakhyt Sultanov of Kazakhstan, and collectively 
with the Swiss Authorities to discuss the org anization of the Conference. In this regard, we sent out 
a letter of invitation for the conference to all Members to attend an in -person Conference in Geneva. 
It is my sincere hope that Ministers and Heads of Delegation will come to Geneva for face to face  
engagement – despite the challenges posed by the Pandemic – given the importance of this meeting 
for the future of this organization. Let me also mention that I have issued the formal Airgram 
convening the conference – in document WTO/AIR/MIN/3 on 8 Septe mber.  
As the GC Chair informed delegations last week, the Secretariat is planning an Information Session 
on 6 October in which details on logistical arrangements will be provided. This will also be the 
opportunity to respond to specific logistical issues or conc erns that have been raised by delegations.  
But what I would like to stress is that, regardless of the format of MC12, we must aim to finalize as 
much as possible in advance. Leaving a lot to the last -minute negotiation and overburdening 
Ministers is not a  recipe for success – as previous experiences have shown.  In this regard, I agree 
with the GC Chair's suggestion that we must have a clear idea of how things are shaping up by the 
end of next month. This will give us time to make any required course correc tion and manage 
expectations, or re -think MC12 if required.  
Since MC11 in 2017, the world, our trading system and this organization have confronted – and still 
face extraordinary challenges that necessitate exceptional responses from all of us. MC12 is 
therefore not just another Ministerial Conference.  
Some might hold the view that even without results at MC12, business will continue as usual the 
next day. But I am sure that each of us knows well that the WTO will not be the same after a failed 
MC12. Yes, the WTO will be here – business will continue as usual, but it will be increasingly empty 
business. It is clear that people are really supporting us – but it is also clear that this support is 
predicated on seeing a change in the way we do business.  Busine ss as usual, which at the WTO has 
come to mean little or no results, is not what people are looking for. And, if this is what we deliver 
at MC12 – we can expect that the result for post MC12 work to be less business for this organization. 
People will take decisions elsewhere even on issues where the WTO is the logical forum – because 
they will feel that we cannot deliver. If we look well, we can already see signs of this. It is imminent 
and eminent. I am sorry to be the constant bearer of this news – but th is is the truth and we should 
internalize it.  
Ministerial Outcome Document  
This should drive us to work towards a concise yet meaningful and directional Ministerial outcome 
document. And I want to thank the GC Chair for his leadership and tireless efforts in assisting 
Members to do this.  
After six years without a multilateral WTO Ministerial Outcome – I understand that the last was in 
Nairobi in 2015 – it is time that WTO Ministers collectively spoke positively to the world. Therefore, 
I am urging you all t o rise beyond individual interest, bear in mind the current context, internalize 
that we cannot fail and see the bigger picture.  
Conclusion and way forward  
 
Let me conclude with words of strategic encouragement drawing on my recent experience here. In 
July, many people felt we should cancel the 15 July meeting because it might fail. And I said no, we 
should not do that. When I took this job, I said my job was to help Members deliver results. I have 
never been afraid of success and I encourage you likewise. Sometimes it seems to me that after 
long periods without concrete results, failure becomes comfortable. But that is not why I took this WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 135 - 
 
  job. Please do not let negotiating fatigue and frustration creep in. Let us keep trying. I am sure that 
if we have the r ight mindset, we can deliver.  
On my part, I will continue to support all of you and the GC Chair. I will continue to talk to all the 
groups and if necessary, I will travel as I have been trying to do to Capitals to also try to get a pulse 
of what they are  thinking and what they are doing. We will exhaust all avenues to make sure we 
deliver.  xxx 
Let me now turn to our GC Chair, Ambassador Dacio  Castillo (Honduras). Thank you, Dacio, for the 
extensive efforts you have made and your leadership. We will contin ue our collaborative efforts 
together with Kazakhstan to ensure a successful MC12. I will stop here and give the floor to the 
General Council Chair before opening it up for Members' interventions.  
 
Concluding Remarks  
 
I want to commend all Members for your fortitude. I want to thank all 46 delegations that intervened 
today – quite a number – and put their thoughts on the table. I thought delegations were being 
frank. I want to thank all the Negotiating Group Chairs and the GC Chair for all their efforts  in 
preparation for MC12. We are all in this together. I join the GC Chair's call that we should take stock 
of our progress sometime in late October so we get a good idea of what can actually be forwarded 
to the Ministerial Conference.  
 
Let me say that I a m ending the meeting a bit more heartened than when I started. It is not that 
the deep divisions have gone away. They have actually been exposed during the discussion. But it 
is that Members have recommitted to the multilateral trading system, to the WTO a nd to a successful 
MC12. And that is really heartening. As you know, when I started this, what I said was that I felt 
that some delegations may not want a successful MC12. They may want it to fail. But it looks like 
virtually every delegation is ready to w ork towards a successful MC12. Everyone realizes that one 
that fails is a stain in this organization that may not be easy to remove. If this follows what happened 
at MC11 then this will not be good for the Trade Ministers especially given that there has be en four 
years in between to try to plan something that is successful.  
 
Even though I am heartened, I still want to leave you all with the need to reflect on where we are 
and to think of the big picture of this organization. If you really want it to be a pl ace that helps with 
trade integration, let us not plan for failure. Let us plan for success. In any case, you know that it is 
really nice that Members used the James Bond analogy throughout the meeting and not the Mission 
Impossible analogy. That is really  very good. So, thank you all for making that effort to reassure 
each other, reassure all of us, that you are committed.  
 
15.7.   I heard certain things and it looks like on the issue of focus we are all converging on the 
things to be delivered. I heard about the response to the pandemic as a central issue that we would 
all like to see delivered. I heard about fisheries, agriculture, WTO Reform especially the dispute 
settlement system, S&DT and development issues and the reaffirmation of that especially issues 
affecting LDCs and LLDCs.  
I want to applaud the progress in the JSIs – the JSI on Services Domestic Regulation where we 
heard the report that it is almost concluding, E -Commerce that is moving along, Investment 
Facilitation for Development, MSMEs and Women an d Trade. These are all the reports that were put 
on the table.  
 
On the issue of the high shipping costs and scarcity of containers, many SMEs have already written 
– actually that's what caught us on the road to looking into this issue. I received letters from SMEs 
complaining that, whereas the large companies can weath er the cost of this, they are being squeezed 
out. This was of great concern. We have already initiated talks with the large shipping companies to 
understand what is happening. We recently had a meeting with MCM of France, the third largest 
company. We are looking into this much more. But there is a supply and demand factor squarely 
behind this. There is the pent-up demand from the fiscal stimulus. There is also the demand for 
inventories coming from business. This is leading to a real huge demand for shippi ng goods from 
one place to the other because some businesses are afraid of what might happen to their supply 
chains and they are trying to manage risks by increasing inventory. So, there are a number of factors 
he explained to us. His company has frozen fr eight costs. They are the only ones who have done it. 
That is why is one of the reasons why we are interested because he feels that what is happening is WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 136 - 
 
  really not normal especially for SMEs. But we are talking to them. As we get more information, we 
will share it with you. It is a market -driven thing we are seeing. Perhaps based on that, we can see 
where we go forward with this particular issue.  
 
Before concluding, let me update you with regard to two administrative issues: (i) the Secretariat's 
return to office – because many of you have expressed interest in that and, (ii) the Secretariat 
Structural Review. The WTO Health Task Force, which is handling this in the Secretariat, continues 
its close coordination with the Swiss Authorities. I have also been in  contact with other Heads of 
International Organizations in Geneva to understand what they are doing. Every Head is actually 
waiting to see what the other Head will do before they move. When we had dinner, we found out 
that we are all waiting for each othe r. But one or two have started to move.  
 
Our current goal is to have a staged approach of Secretariat staff coming back at 60% on a rotational 
basis. We had wanted to start that on 20 September but we decided to delay it for another month 
to 20 October, to  provide staff who have not yet been vaccinated the chance to do so. Most of the 
Ambassadors I have spoken to have been vaccinated. But I would like to urge anyone who has not 
yet been vaccinated to do so as we will be coming in and out of the building.  
 
Once we start this policy of 60% coming back to the office on a rotational basis on 20 October, all 
Secretariat staff will have to show their vaccination certificate before entering the building – as is 
the case with participants in this week's Public Forum . Staff who choose not to be vaccinated will be 
required to present a negative PCR or antigen test result, probably at their own expense.  
 
With respect to delegates, I have urged that those who have not yet been vaccinated to get 
vaccinated. But I will al so consult with the GC Chair on these issues and on how he might want this 
to be handled. We have spoken about staff but we have not yet spoken about delegates. So I will 
come back to you to talk about that. But I would be very happy for things to start ge tting back to 
normal and to start seeing you all coming into the building.  
 
Concerning the Secretariat Strategic Review that we are undertaking, you remember I already 
highlighted the main takeaways from the July report prepared by McKinsey, the firm that  we 
contracted. I once again thank all delegations who participated in that process – and many of you 
did. I am really gratified that you took the trouble. And the GC Chair was also interviewed at length. 
As we look at the report, it is obvious that we wil l need to address some areas based on the 
recommendations they made. But our contract with McKinsey has ran out. We did not include the 
implementation part in it. So we had to advertise again as it is obvious that we need help with 
implementation. That has  been done through the Procurement Contract Committee. At the same 
time, it has been recommended that we establish a temporary Transformation Unit from within that 
would be in charge to make sure that implementation would involve staff and managers, and to  the 
extent needed, also Ambassadors and delegates. That would help us run this from the inside. We 
will advertise that shortly for someone from inside the organization. We are also looking at all the 
possible ways to engage staff in this process and we wi ll update you through probably the CBFA or 
other means. I thought it would be good to share with you what is happening since what we are 
doing is based on the feedback from the surveys you took part on and from the staff surveys.  
 
Most likely, given the f act that we have MC12 and we do not want to divert intention from the work 
we have to do, we might just start with things that are not destabilizing to anyone, some HR 
processes that staff have said they wanted to be looked at like promotions, mobility, ca reer pathways 
and performance management. We may start with those and then see how we go from there until 
we finish MC12 for any other piece of work we might need to do.  
 
So, we want to focus on helping you deliver for MC12. Let me also inform delegations of my intention 
to convene in November a Formal TNC Meeting. This is a tradition before a Ministerial Conference. 
In addition to assessing the state of play in our negotiating efforts, it will also be the occasion for 
Negotiating Group Chairs to provide th eir formal written reports to be transmitted to the Ministerial 
Conference through the General Council.  
 
Those are the things that I would like to share with you. On 6 October, we will provide more 
information on the Conference itself so that you get up -to-date on the information you need. With 
that, we have covered all the ground. I want to thank you enormously for your patience today and 
for the very good contributions we have heard. I know that the divisions are there but we are all 
committed to deliver.  After 20 years, let us really deliver – just one or two things for this Conference WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 137 - 
 
  and then we will also look at what we will be doing post MC12. Thank you so much and have a 
wonderful evening. The meeting is closed.  
 
_______________  
 
 
  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 138 - 
 
  STATEMENT BY AMBA SSADOR DACIO CASTILLO, CHAIR OF THE GENERAL COUNCIL  
Thank you, Director -General, for convening this meeting. Work has intensified in the final stages of 
our MC12 preparations. And I join you Dr. Ngozi in commending Members' active participation in all 
the ongoing processes.  
 
After the summer break, we began the process on a possible MC12 outcome document. This work 
takes account of, and builds on, all my consultations with delegations since April. I refer you to my 
reports in JOB/GC/259, /262 and /268, which should be read together.  
 
I again consulted with interested Members on this matter. To facilitate the process, I have been 
meeting with group coordinators and a number of other delegations in a broadly representative 
group format. Informal GC m eetings have also been held regularly for transparency purposes – and 
I conducted further consultations yesterday.  
 
As a result of my interactions with Members, I presented a skeleton of the possible outcome 
document. This is divided in two parts. We will focus on Part One, which would comprise (i) the 
context in which MC12 takes place; (ii) some broad political messages; (iii) guidance from Ministers 
on additional elements Members may agree on. Part Two relates to references or a list of possible 
Ministeri al Decisions, work programmes, separate declarations or reports – which are the subject of 
ongoing work in various processes.  
 
As I said at the Informal General Council meeting last week, based on our discussions with Members, 
I will try my hand at fleshin g out some language for a possible outcome document, as a starting 
point. Next week, we will start considering possible language on 'Context' and Over -Arching 'Political 
Messages' in this representative group format. I will then update Members on the proce ss during 
the 7-8 October GC meeting.  
 
Also at our meeting next week, I will report on my consultations on the E -Commerce Work 
Programme and Moratorium.  
 
On the organization of MC12, as the DG has mentioned, we met with the MC12 Chair, H.E. Minister 
Bakhyt  Sultanov, and the Swiss Authorities. I again encourage all Members to attend the Information 
Session on MC12 logistical arrangements on Wednesday, 6 October and I draw your attention to the 
Information Note in document WT/MIN(21)/INF/5 for further details . 
 
As we reach the final stages of our MC12 preparations, I encourage all Members to redouble efforts 
in reaching texts in various areas. These texts will be transmitted to the Ministerial Conference 
through the General Council. As such, we need to take th is into account and aim to finish texts on 
possible outcomes as soon as we can.  
Let me therefore encourage all Members to reach out to each other and begin to bridge gaps. I 
remain open to facilitate in this regard. Together with the DG and the entire Memb ership, let's work 
to ensure a successful MC12.  
_______________  
  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 139 - 
 
  ORAL REPORT BY AMBASSADOR GLORIA ABRAHAM PERALTA  (COSTA RICA),  
CHAIR OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON  
AGRICULTURE AND SUB -COMMITTEE ON COTTON  
 
Let me briefly update you on the state of play in the agriculture negotiations.  
 
I circulated my draft Ministerial texts before the summer break on 29 July.  Members provided their 
comments on it during the CoA SS meeting and dedicated discussions on PSH and SSM held on 7 -8 
September, and the subsequent meetings on 20 and 21 September.  
 
There have also been several new submissions, including one by India on Domestic Support, one by 
the C -4 on Cotton and another by the ACP group on COVID -19 impact on agricultural markets, as 
well as an update by Canada of its analytical tool on Domestic Support.  
 
Regarding the process, I announced at the CoA SS meeting last week that I will launch a topic -by-
topic "room D" -type process during the week of 4 October. The purpose of these meetings will be t o 
engage in focused, text -based discussions on what could constitute a possible outcome at MC12.  
 
I invited Members to come prepared to make specific textual contributions to improve the draft 
negotiating text, so as to enhance its prospects for attracting  consensus and identify possible landing 
zones.  
 
I have also engaged in a series of parallel small groups consultations including at Heads -of-
Delegation level, for further inputs and political guidance to our process.   
 
I will report on all my consultations during the next CoA SS meeting in mid -October.  
 
As I have stated on numerous occasions, I am a facilitator - so negotiations can only progress if they 
take place between Members, and not between individual Members and me.  
 
Therefore, I am enc ouraged by the indications provided about ongoing work between various groups 
of proponents and non -proponents to explore possible areas of convergence on some of the key 
negotiating issues.  
 
This type of work is indeed needed as there are still strong di vergences in Members' positions on a 
range of issues, in particular, on DS and PSH which are the core issues that will determine the level 
of ambition of the overall outcome.  
 
Of course, other topics are also important for an outcome and in this context I would like to take 
this opportunity to recall the upcoming celebration of World Cotton Day on 7 October.  
 
The negotiations have now entered the final stretch. I will ask Members to demonstrate pragmatism, 
realism, and compromise and work together with a he ightened sense of urgency to further narrow 
down their differences and find realistic landing zones.  
 
The next open ended CoA SS meeting is scheduled to take place on 14 October and we need to have 
a clearer view on the landing zones and possible shape of an outcome by that time.  
 
_______________  
 
  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 140 - 
 
  ORAL REPORT BY AMBASSADOR KADRA AHMED HASSAN (DJIBOUTI),  
CHAIR OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE  
ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT  
It will be recalled that, in the first half of 2021, I held a series of informal, open -ended meetings of 
the CTD SS. The purpose of these meetings was to explore how to move forward on the ten 
Agreement -specific proposals on special and differential treatment submitted by the G -90. 
  
The discussions that took place in these me etings unfortunately triggered little in terms of 
substantive exchange. Indeed, I did not see the level of engagement among Members that I had 
hoped on the substance of the proposals.  
 
Members' perspectives on the G -90 proposals also differed. On the one hand, the delegations with 
concerns on these proposals were not willing to engage in discussions on substance, as they stated 
that these proposals had already been considered before. On the other hand, and in response, the 
G-90 – with the support of some o ther Members – said that they had provided sufficient rationale 
for their proposals, both in their written submissions and in their oral interventions, and that the 
proposals now provided a good basis for taking the discussion further. They also expressed regret 
that they were not getting proactive engagement from all Members.  
 
I shared my assessment, as you recall, at the Informal TNC –Heads of Delegation meeting of 23 July 
that, unless there is real engagement on the substance by all Members, we will not b e able to make 
the progress that we need to see in order to have a concrete outcome on the G -90 proposals by 
MC12.  
 
I would add that I listened with interest to the frank and open discussion on S&D that took place at 
the General Council meeting of 27 and 2 8 July, on the basis of the G -90 Declaration on S&D circulated 
in document WT/GC/234. In my view, this is the kind of dialogue that will be needed if Members are 
to ultimately resolve the difficulties surrounding S&D, including in the context of the negoti ations in 
the CTD SS.  
 
Members had the opportunity to pick up on the work of the CTD SS at a formal meeting of the 
Committee held on 24 September. At the meeting, the G -90 introduced a new submission, circulated 
on 14 September in documents JOB/DEV/65 and JOB/DEV/97. As I understand it, the document 
provides further rationale for the G -90 proposals, and builds on the earlier submissions by the 
proponents.  
 
However, I regret to say that, in the course of the discussion, I did not detect any significant shift s 
in Members' positions on the G -90 proposals.  Indeed, well -known positions were essentially 
repeated. The stalemate in the CTD SS therefore continues, although it should be said that several 
Members, some with differing views on the G -90 proposals, did ne vertheless recognize S&D as a 
fundamental pillar of the multilateral trading system.  
  
I took the opportunity to once again stress the importance of finding a way forward in these 
negotiations, while also reiterating that it is in Members' hands to find th is way forward. As Chair, I 
will certainly convene as many meetings, and facilitate as many discussions, as are needed. 
However, it is ultimately for Members to show the necessary flexibility and political will to collaborate, 
so as to collectively determi ne how the work in the CTD SS can advance.  
 
With this in mind, and in view of the limited time remaining until MC12, I emphasized the need to 
pick up the work in the CTD SS with a sense of urgency. As I said at the meeting, I remain committed 
to working w ith Members to see whether it may be possible to arrive at a concrete outcome on the 
G-90 proposals by the time of the Ministerial Conference. I shall therefore be continuing to reach 
out to delegations for informal consultations in the coming weeks, in or der to try to make the 
required progress.  
 
Finally, I think it is worth making the observation that the difficulties surrounding S&D will not simply 
go away. This is why I strongly believe that it is only by tackling these issues and working together 
that Members will be able to find the much -needed solutions and to bridge the existing gaps. I 
therefore call on Members to participate actively and constructively in the informal discussions that 
I will be organizing, and I repeat once again the need for urge ncy in our work, given that MC12 is 
literally just a few weeks away.   WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 141 - 
 
  ORAL REPORT BY AMBASSADOR ZHANAR AITZHANOVA (KAZAKHSTAN),  
CHAIR OF THE SPECIAL SESSION OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN SERVICES  
 
I am pleased to provide you today with my report as Chair of  the Special Session of the Council for 
Trade in Services.  
 
In my report to the TNC in July, I indicated that I had heard a good level of support for having a 
paragraph on services in the MC12 outcome document, in the context of the built -in negotiating 
mandate under Article XIX of the GATS.  Elements mentioned by delegations for a text then included 
the following: - underscoring the exploratory discussions undertaken in the CTS SS since MC11; - 
recognition of the pandemic's impact on services;  and, in that context, reaffirmation of the built -in 
agenda to revitalize work.  
 
In July, I asked that interested delegations submit their proposed language before September, and 
a group of Members circulated their proposed text on 26 August.  We discussed this matter during 
an informal meeting of the Special Session last week, on 22 September.   
 
Overall, I think that discussions at our meeting confirmed a broad level of support for having a short 
text on services in the MC12 outcome document.  Reasons mentio ned for having text in relation to 
Article XIX included the growth in the economic impact of services and the impact of COVID -19, and 
the role of services in post pandemic economic recovery.   
 
We had a good discussion on the text proposed by the group of M embers.  Certain reservations or 
sensitivities were voiced, and specific comments and further text proposals were put forward, and I 
think that most delegations that intervened saw that there was a good basis for further focused 
discussions.   
 
As I stressed in my concluding remarks at the meeting, I do not see the proposals discussed envisage 
that MC12 would mark the re -launch of negotiations.  In my view, the intention is more about sending 
a political signal on the importance of engaging in the cont ext of the built -in agenda; and it is more 
about agreeing to have a discussion about the negotiating agenda after MC12, rather than about 
agreeing to start negotiations.  I think it is important to keep this in mind as delegations aim to 
engage in a constru ctive manner and consider possible language for a ministerial outcome 
document.   
 
Chair, I had observed in July that converging on text would only occur if a good dose of realism and 
pragmatism was exhibited.  With the limited time left until MC12, this is even more true now.   
 
I encouraged Members that had proposed text to discuss and explore synergies, and I offered to 
conduct small group consultations.  Some delegations signalled that they might table new text 
proposals, and I encouraged them to build on t he texts and suggestions already made and to engage 
in consultations with interested Members.  I will look to convene further meetings of the Special 
Session in October to report on consultations and identify areas of convergence on text.   
 
 
_______________  
 
  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 142 - 
 
  ORAL REPORT BY AMBASSADOR SANTIAGO WILLS (COLOMBIA),  
CHAIR OF THE NEGOTIATING GROUP ON RULES  
 
As you all know, the Ministerial -level meeting of the Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) took place 
on 15 July when Ministers instructed us to finish the fis heries subsidies negotiations as soon as 
possible, and well before MC12. And, to get there, we should work towards collectively improving 
the draft text to use during line -by-line negotiations.  
 
On that basis, on 30 July, I circulated an outline for a two -stage work programme for the fall.  
 
The first stage, starting 1 September through to early October comprises consultations in different 
formats with interested delegations and intensive text -based work. The objective of the first stage 
is to discuss what Ministers identified as "macro issues " with a view to collectively improving the 
draft text to be used in the next stage, starting in mid -October, of line -by-line negotiations.  
 
For the second stage, the idea is to meet in open -ended format every day to go through the text 
clause -by-clause w ith an aim of producing a clean text well before MC12. We will need to leave 
enough time for Capitals to consider the results of the work, so I have suggested that we aim to 
finish this second stage by late October.  
 
So, as I make my report today, we are c urrently nearing the end of the text -based discussion of 
"macro" issues with about one week left. Over the last three weeks, I held a number of plenary 
sessions and small group meetings, and also have tried to allow a good amount of time for Members 
to eng age with each other, and with me if so requested. The discussions in the meetings largely 
focused on the overcapacity and overfishing pillar, including the perceived imbalance that has been 
raised by some Members, as well as the prohibition of subsidies to  fishing or fishing related activities 
in areas beyond national jurisdictions. We also have had some discussions on notification and 
transparency and non -specific fuel subsidies. Next week we will hold sessions on transparency and 
notifications, and automa ticity under the IUU pillar.  
 
I would like to thank all delegations for their active engagement so far.  
 
As anticipated, the discussion on the perceived imbalance in Article 5 has been challenging. 
Therefore, today I would like to focus on this part of t he work of the NGR over the past few weeks.  
My first point would be that the idea of where the balance should lie varies among Members. Some 
see a need for an internal rebalancing within Article 5.1; some see this need within Article 5.5; 
others see the n eed for a different balance between Articles 5.1 and 5.5; others see the question as 
one of balance between the obligation to respect sustainability and the right to provide subsidies; 
and many other Members continue to see that the current draft strikes t he right balance.  
 
I have to admit that I am quite concerned with the current dynamics. Although I knew that a major 
breakthrough might not be possible in this phase of our process, I had hoped that we would see 
steady and incremental progress toward great er convergence, as Members engaged in a very 
focused and highly interactive process of considering the specific provisions in the draft text.  
 
While the discussions have become considerably more interactive than they were before the summer 
break, it is un fortunate that we still have a lot of statements of position being read, rather than the 
text-focused process I had imagined and planned. Of particular concern, some of the statements do 
not show evolution or openness to evolve positions. In fact, I have h eard several statements about 
consistency and long -held positions. While consistency can be very positive in many situations, for 
negotiations, if positions never change, no progress can be made. I want to emphasize that this is 
not the case for all delega tions. There are quite a few whose positions have evolved considerably, 
toward the middle, over the past months and even recent weeks. I believe that such a spirit of 
compromise is what we need, and it should be acknowledged.  
 
Among the new ideas that we h ave seen, some would replace entire articles with a new approach, 
structurally and substantively rather than working within the existing structure of the text. Members 
of course have the right to make such proposals as they wish. And any proposed change th at attracts 
greater convergence is of course most welcome. Where this is not the case based on the reactions 
of other Members, it is important that the proponents be willing to engage with others in a solution -
oriented discussion to address the specific co ncerns that underlie that proposal.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 143 - 
 
  Here I would note that there are always multiple possible routes to address any given concern, not 
all of which necessarily require a direct and explicit provision. The goal needs to be to address the 
concern while pro viding sufficient comfort for other Members with different concerns. Thus, the fact 
that a proposal is not simply copied and pasted does not mean that the proponent's concerns are 
not being addressed. While again acknowledging the right of each Member to p ut forward arguments 
and proposals, I know that I am not alone in being concerned that, if the current dynamics of 
engagement are maintained, we risk going backwards, not just to where we were before the summer 
break, but by years or even decades.  
 
A numbe r of Members have noted that the structure of Article 5 in the draft text was a response to 
several competing ideas about the basic approach to disciplines on subsidies that contribute to 
overcapacity and overfishing. This hybrid approach in the text, whic h took elements from these 
previous proposals, has evolved considerably since it was first presented in June last year, and seeks 
to create a careful balance and complementarity between the different parts of the article. That 
evolution was driven by input s from many Members, developed, developing, and least -developed. 
It is of course not perfect, and can be improved. But to improve it, means to make it more acceptable 
to more Members, through drafting changes that better accommodate the considerably diverg ing 
concerns of Members in the critical provisions of the disciplines.   
 
I am raising these points today because according to our work programme, we have completed the 
text-based discussion on Article 5 addressing the "macro" issues that were identified. I n a couple of 
weeks, we are expected to begin line -by-line discussions.  
 
We have all heard calls for a revised text to use in those discussions. At this point I am reflecting 
deeply on how much clarity, if any, the discussions we have held these past coup le of weeks have 
provided on textual changes that would attract greater convergence. I would invite all Members to 
also reflect on this question, taking into account everything that other Members have said during 
our meetings this fall.  
 
MC12 is very clos e. If we are to follow the instruction from Ministers in July and deliver to them a 
clean text well ahead of the Ministerial, we need to start getting much more focused and pragmatic.  
To help prepare for today's TNC, I went again carefully through the sta tements by the 102 Members 
who took the floor at the July Ministerial meeting. That day, while no Member said the text was 
perfect, nearly all Members – from all regions, and representing all levels of development - indicated 
that the current text was a go od basis for reaching a landing zone, with some of course pointing to 
particular areas where they would be seeking changes as the negotiations moved forward. No 
delegation indicated that it could not work with the text.  
 
With all of that being said, this remains a Member -led process, so I can only keep emphasizing that 
Members need to continue to speak to each other, especially to those with different views, and to 
think creatively and pragmatically to find textual approac hes that could accommodate to the greatest 
extent possible their diverging interests. I look forward to hearing from you. As you know, my door 
is always open and I would be happy to join any configuration you may organize, if you think that 
is useful.  
 
Allow me to conclude, DG, with a brief thought. Colleagues, let us not forget that we are negotiating; 
we are not just debating. In this process no Member's goal should be to 'win the argument' or to 
convince the other that the only way forward is its own po sition. Unfortunately, however, at times 
it seems like our discussions tend to go that way. Based on the history of the past 20 years of 
negotiations, I believe that if everyone adopts that approach, it will lead us to a lose -lose situation. 
Again, let's b e reminded that we are negotiating, and as for any negotiation, Members' approach 
should be to work together - and work hard - towards reaching our common goal. We are seeking a 
win-win situation.  
 
I sincerely hope that in the few weeks left before MC12, we all are able to adopt this mindset. If we 
do, colleagues, I 'm convinced we will succeed.  
 
This concludes my report.  
 
_______________  
 
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 144 - 
 
  ANNEX 3 
STATEMENTS BY MEMBERS AT THE INFORMAL TNC AND INFORMAL HODS MEETINGS 
HELD ON 30 SEPTEMBER  2021  
Following the General Council Chairman's statement under Item 1 of the agenda of this meeting – 
"Report on Informal TNC and Informal HODs Meetings", the statemen ts delivered  by: Brazil, 
Switzerland, Mexico, Japan, Turkey, Mauritius  (African Group) , Chile  (Structured Discussions on 
Investment Facilitation for Development) , Bangladesh, Australia  (Joint Statement Initiative on 
Electronic Commerce and CAIRNS Group) , Norway , the European Union, Singapore, South Africa, 
Tunisia, Jamaica (ACP) , Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Arab Group) , New Zealand, China, the Philippines, 
Indonesia, the United Kingdom, Costa Rica (Joint Initiative on Services Domestic Regulation) , the 
Russian  Federation, Chad (LDCs), India, Uruguay  (Informal Working Group on MSMEs) , Argentina, 
Mongolia, Iceland  (Informal Working Group on Trade and Gender) , Egypt, Nigeria, Panama 
(Article  XII Members) , Republic of Korea, Pakistan, Hong Kong, Chinese Taipei, Nep al, Canada 
(Structured Discussions on Trade and Environmental Sustainability and Ottawa Group) , Uganda,  
Viet Nam, Colombia, Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Sri Lanka, Republic of Moldova, Honduras 
and Cameroon; are included below as part of the Minutes o f the General Council meeting . 
_______________  
1. Brazil  
 
Brazil is strongly committed to the multilateral trading system, supports a reform that modernizes 
and revitalizes the WTO, and sees the MC -12 as a stepping -stone in that process of reform and of 
strengthening the Organization.  
 
Since the beginning of this year, Brazil has circulated ideas on what should constitute a package for 
MC12. As we are less than two months away from the Ministerial Conference, it is time to consider 
very carefully the cont ent of such package of deliverables.  We need to send a message at MC12. A 
clear message that the WTO can deliver solutions to current trade issues.  
 
As we expressed in our JOB/GC/253 for the informal GC, of March, we should consider four elements 
for a MC12 package:  
 
Trade and Health: we need a deliverable that confirms the relevance of international trade and WTO 
rules when facing the challenges posed by current and future pandemics. We welcome the work 
being carried out by Ambassador Walker and the rec ent US conceptual document on Trade and 
Health. It complements the Ottawa Group´s Trade and Health Initiative and we are confident that 
we can now find a multilateral agreement for Ministers at MC12.  
 
Agriculture: WTO rules, which advance international tra de, are also vital for addressing the global 
challenges of food security and sustainability. Establishing a process to update the agriculture 
rulebook on domestic support - as per article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture -, enhancing the 
work of the SPS committee, and looking into the future of agriculture trade and sustainability are 
vital components of a package. Food security is about access to food, and international trade plays 
a fundamental role. Brazil is ready to work constructively on all those f ronts. But let me be clear: 
efforts to roll -back current trade rules in agriculture, to create new barriers to agriculture trade 
disguised as environmental protection, or to legitimize distortive subsidies via instruments such as 
PSH are dealbreakers for B razil. 
 
Fisheries: We must conclude the fisheries subsidies negotiations with the highest component of 
sustainability. If we are not able to reach an agreement by MC12, we need to be realistic about the 
prospects of the dossier at the WTO. It will certainl y send a negative message about our collective 
will to work in the intersection between trade and sustainability.  
 
Finally, regarding institutional reform and revitalization of the WTO: we certainly need to launch 
negotiations at the MC12 aimed at restorin g the functionality and full effectiveness of the dispute 
settlement system before MC13, as well as to explore the pathway that leads to the flexible geometry 
of plurilateral negotiations at the WTO. Brazil and the EU have proposed the creation of a workin g 
group with exactly that purpose. Reinvigorating the dispute settlement and the negotiating pillars of 
this Organization is of critical importance for those Members that wish to move trading rules forward 
- into the future - and to strengthen the WTO.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 145 - 
 
  Brazil's engagement will be based on these parameters in the next few months.  
 
2. Switzerland  
 
The situation is serious and progress made since the resumption of work after the summer break is 
insufficient. It is high time to adapt our working methods. This means focusing efforts on priority 
issues. It also means adjusting expectations to the conditions of each negotiating area. And we 
should do this as soon as possible if we want a successful MC12.  
 
Trade and health is a key issue. The situation is constantl y evolving. Thanks to numerous 
partnerships, the pharmaceutical industry has managed to increase production exponentially. Such 
partnerships are based on the legal certainty provided by the IP framework. But as we know vaccines 
do not save lives. Vaccinati on does. We therefore need to address distribution and access issues and 
work with relevant actors such as COVAX.  
 
Work under Ambassador Walker's leadership has shown that the WTO can make an important 
contribution to improving the management of pandemic c risis. Indeed, disciplining trade restrictions, 
facilitating trade, creating greater transparency and a health market information system can make 
a real difference to ensure the flow and availability of medical goods. The protection of intellectual 
propert y also has a role to play in a holistic approach to pandemics.  
 
Concluding the negotiation on fisheries subsidies at MC12 remains a priority. We should avoid 
making de novo proposals that hinder convergence. The chair 's text is the outcome of a lengthy 
negotiating process and provides a good approximation for an agreement. We should use it as a 
basis and make the necessary adjustments to reach a consensus.  
 
Regarding agriculture, we need to adjust expectations and the level of ambition. A drafting exercise  
should be based on a concise and consensus -oriented text. In our view, i mmediate outcomes for 
MC12 may consist of exempting  the World Food program from any export -restrictive measures as 
well as of transparency elements. Beyond that, we should aim for a b alanced work programme that 
does not pre -empt outcomes.   
 
Switzerland furthermore welcomes the exploratory exchanges on market access for services and 
calls for a deepening of these discussions.  
 
A common understanding of the way forward after MC12 will a lso be important for systemic issues, 
including WTO reform and dispute settlement.  
 
In addition, we look forward to making concrete progress on all joint statement initiatives. With the 
finalisation this week of the Reference Paper on domestic regulations in services, the conclusion of 
negotiations is within reach. This will send a strong  and positive signal to the WTO stakeholders that 
the organisation can deliver. And this is a good omen for MC12.  
 
3. Mexico   
 
I want to start once again by thanking you for your report and to the Chairs of the negotiating groups 
and the coordinators of th e Joint Initiatives for their respective reports and work.  
 
Madam Chair, we are now two months from the beginning of the Ministerial Conference, which will 
take place after 4 years, we have to be responsible and realistic in what we can achieve.  
 
On the on e hand, we appreciate the efforts and flexibility shown by the participants in the work of 
the Joint Initiatives, which are moving forward and yielding results.  
 
On Services Domestic Regulations, we have finally achieved a stable text and been able to eli minate 
the pending square brackets, which leads it towards an outcome at MC12. We are also pleased that 
other delegations have joined that Initiative, making us 65 participants, and we hope that many 
more will.  
 
Concerning MSMEs, we want to acknowledge the  work done under the leadership of 
Ambassador  Cancela, in the discussions and approval of a Ministerial Declaration, and a package of 
six voluntary and non -binding recommendations.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 146 - 
 
   
The other two JSIs, on Investment Facilitation and Electronic Commerce, are still showing 
convergence and significant steps forward. However, this momentum has not been transferred to 
the multilateral level, which forces us, in a way, to recalibrate our expectations for December.  
 
On fisheries subsidies, the issue to  which we have all committed ourselves and which has been 
identified on multiple occasions as a priority to achieve a result in MC12, we see with concern that 
the Chair's text is being confronted with new proposals at this late stage which, far from bridgi ng 
gaps, have a completely different effect.  
 
On agriculture, a topic of special interest to many developing countries and where there has been 
little progress since Nairobi, unfortunately, and despite the efforts of Ambassador Abraham, we see 
that there is not enough appetite or flexibility to achieve an ambitious result in MC12. However, we 
must ensure we establish work programs that focus and streamline our discussions  to continue the 
reform process towards the Ministerial Conference.  
  
Regarding trade and health, it is important for our delegation that the MC12 reflects the commitment 
of the WTO to the economic recovery from this and future health crises. In this sense, we support 
and appreciate the work of Ambassador Walker focused on outlining the res ponse of our 
organization.  
 
Finally, Chair, we have very little time left and we need to act with pragmatism, while we must be 
efficient in our work and refrain, as far as possible, from presenting last minute proposals that do 
not contribute to reaching c onsensus. Due to the health situation and the potential absence of some 
Ministers at the Ministerial, we cannot allow ourselves to reach MC12 with open texts and highly 
polarized positions, we must act responsibly, and you can count on my dele gation to do that.  
 
4. Japan  
 
Thank you, Chair. Only two months remain until MC12, but wide gaps remain among Members. 
Members should be realistic, focus on areas where concrete outcomes are most needed, particularly 
the fisheries negotiation and the pandemic response , and accelerate efforts to build convergence 
with a sense of urgency.  
 
Fisheries negotiation  
 
With MC12 fast approaching , now is not the time to expand our discussion. We should really focus 
on the current text and its adjustments. Departure from the current structure, which reflects long -
time negotiations, will not help. We have to find a landing zone with the mindset that all Members 
contribute appropriately to marine sustainability through disciplines on fish stocks that each Member 
is responsible f or themselves. Japan is ready to engage in the final phase of negotiations under the 
guidance of the Chair, Ambassador Santiago WILLS, toward achieving a meaningful outcome.  
 
Pandemic  
 
It is crucial for the WTO  to deliver a concrete outcome on its response  to COVID -19. At MC12, we 
should agree on a meaningful Ministerial Declaration on health that holistically includes important 
factors, in particular, trade facilitation, export restrictions, production expansion of C OVID -19 
vaccines and therapeutics, as described in the draft General Council Declaration on Trade and Health 
(WT/GC/W/823/Rev.1), and intellectual property. We greatly appreciate efforts by Ambassador 
Walker as the facilitator and Ambassador Dagfinn SØRLI as the TRIPS Council Chair.  
 
Agriculture  
 
On agriculture, let me express my gratitude for the efforts made by the COASS Chair, Ambassador 
Gloria ABRAHAM PERALTA. As the world 's second largest net -importing country, transparent and 
predictable agricultural trade is vital for Ja pan's food security. This is why we have engaged actively 
in the agricultural negotiations. However, in the last two COASS meetings, we all witnessed huge 
divergence among Members.  
 
Given the short time remaining, it is high time to recalibrate our ambiti on and seek a realistic 
outcome that includes: i) meaningful but simple work programs; and ii) transparency that is WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 147 - 
 
  essential to both monitor the WTO obligations and to pave the way for informed negotiations. In this 
regard, the EU, the US, Canada and Japa n have submitted a concrete proposal (JOB/AG/213) that 
seeks to streamline and update the current transparency requirements in all areas of agriculture. 
Japan will continue to engage in the discussions to ensure a positive and balanced outcome on 
agricultu re. 
 
Moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions  
 
Japan believes the moratorium on electronic transmissions should be made permanent, or at least, 
renewed at MC12. Failing to do so would damage the certainty and predictability of e -commerce an d 
entire international trade. We appreciate the  General Council Chair 's efforts to facilitate discussions 
for building consensus.  
 
Dispute settlement  
 
The reform of the WTO dispute settlement system remains a matter of urgency.  At MC12, ministers 
should provide guidance toward restoring the proper functioning of the dispute settlement system.   
 
JSIs, Other issues (environmental sustainability, LPF)  
 
Japan has high hopes for achieving concrete outcomes on the JSIs at MC12. Negotiations on services 
domestic regulation is almost complete. We believe the participating Members will be able to 
announce the successful conclusion of the negotiations at MC12, which will send a positive signal to 
the world, particularly to businesses, and give  further momentu m to other JSI negotiations. On e -
commerce, Japan, together with the other co -conveners, Australia and Singapore, would like to 
facilitate and intensify negotiations on key issues such as cross -border data flow. We also expect 
substantial progress in inves tment facilitation.  
 
We believe trade and environmental sustainability is one of the emerging issues that the WTO should 
tackle beyond MC12. Last but not least, Japan continues to attach importance to ensuring a level 
playing field, including strengthened  rules on industrial subsidies, SOEs, and forced technology 
transfer. We would like to promote this important agenda at the WTO.  
 
5. Turkey  
 
We would like to thank you and the Negotiating Group Chairs for their detailed reports. As we draw 
closer to MC12, it is very important to take stock, assess where we are in terms of progress and see 
what we can do  to seek convergence.  
 
Regarding the fisheries subsidies, negotiations should result in the elimination of harmful subsidies with 
the sustainability element accessible by all Members as well as consideration of fishing activities in 
regulated areas of coastal Members and RFMOs a t its core.  
 
We also believe that we have to ensure appropriate and effective S&DT provisions for developing country 
Members. But at the same time, it is equally important, if not more so, to develop comprehensive and 
effective disciplines which can succe ssfully prohibit harmful subsidies. We believe that any outcome 
should be meaningful and balanced for each and every member in line with our mandates.  
 
We observe that divergences still exist on key issues. But the middle ground can be closer than we 
think. It is only true if Members with divergent positions on key issues can immediately start taking 
steps to reach there. We fully support NGR Chair 's tireless efforts in this regard.  
 
As for the agriculture, Turkey underlines the need and the urgency to addr ess the imbalances in the 
Agreement on Agriculture. We believe that AMS beyond de -minimis is the most trade distorting aspect 
of the Agreement to which the priority should be given for a rebalancing effort.  
 
We also support the timely call of G -33 for SSM  and PSH. Being mandated issues, both are also critical 
for food and livelihood security, exacerbated even more with the pandemic, especially in developing 
countries.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 148 - 
 
  At the same time, we now have only two months before MC12 and divergences are quite pron ounced. 
It seems extremely difficult to achieve meaningful results and w e have to be realistic. Agreeing on a 
work plan which will include substantive steps seems a viable option at this stage.  
 
Madam Director General, when it comes to trade and health nex us, w ith the new variants emerging, 
equal access to vaccine has become the main issue.  
 
Since the start of the outbreak, Turkey has done its best to help others and provided medical equipment 
assistance to 159 countries and 12 organizations. We have alrea dy announced that once our vaccine is 
ready, we will offer it to the whole of mankind as a global public good. That is why the affordable and 
rapid supply of vaccines must continue to be prioritized . 
 
The challenges brought by the pandemic are too great an d complex to be overcome by states 
individually, so we have to step up our efforts here also at the WTO. It is clear that Members have 
differing positions on this question: How the WTO can respond to the pandemic? And we do also have 
our own reservations o n some parts of the proposals already on the table.  
 
The pandemic has clearly shown that trade is, in fact, a significant tool for ensuring adequate and swift 
access to the goods and services in times of public health crises. While engaging in this delicate issue, 
we should make sure that our approach is inc lusive, provides necessary policy space and does not result 
in alienating countries from the multilateral trading system.  
  
We welcome the good progress in plurilateral initiatives on services domestic regulation, e -commerce 
and investment facilitation fo r development. We also welcome the recent increase in the number of 
participants of respective JSIs. We are very pleased to have removed the brackets in the reference 
paper on services domestic regulation. We are looking forward to its successful conclusio n at MC12.  
 
On the other hand, for a further inclusive trade, Turkey attaches utmost importance to the work of 
Informal Working Groups on trade and gender as well as MSMEs.  
 
Chair, in concluding, we wish to reiterate our position on the dysfunctional App ellate Body. This is a 
major and critical issue for the organization. Turkey believes that investing our energy on finding 
multilateral ways to maintain the two -tier character of the dispute settlement system is the most 
appropriate way. In the run up to M C12, we wish that we can start focusing on steps to restore this 
mechanism and revitalize the Appellate Body as soon as possible. In this regard, we hope that we can 
initiate a fruitful engagement before and during the Ministerial.  
 
6. Mauritius (African  Group)  
 
Thank you Chair, I also thank the Chairs of different committees for their reports and commend 
them for their commitment to advance the work of the WTO.  
 
The African Group reiterates its commitment to constructively engage in discussions with a vi ew of 
achieving a successful outcome at MC12.  
 
Fisheries Subsidies  
 
On fisheries subsidies, the African Group position is well known to all and we are not going to repeat 
them here.  We will continue to contribute to the discussions in order to reach a bala nced and 
effective outcome that create disciplines to reduce the most harmful subsidies, meet the 
sustainability objectives, and at the same time, provide for effective and appropriate SDT.  
 
We are still concerned about the effectiveness of Article 5.1.1 w hich we feel will maintain the status 
quo for most major subsidisers.  Its current formulation does not meet the sustainability test and we 
have stated the changes in this regard.  
 
On the other hand, in view of the weakness of the SDT provision, the African  Group along with the 
ACP Group has proposed amendments to Article 5.5 in document RD/TN/RL/146.  We believe that 
our proposal provides a good basis for further discussion and to craft appropriate and effective SDT 
as required by the negotiating mandate.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 149 - 
 
  As we prepare to start text -based negotiations, the African Group requests that its proposal be 
included in the text and we call for flexibility from all so that we have an agreement to present to 
the global community by MC12.  
 
Agriculture  
 
Chair, with regard to the negotiations on Agriculture, we have carefully examined the CoA -SS Chair 's 
proposals contained in JOB/AG/215 and we thank her for her efforts.  
 
We, unfortunately, note that little progress has been achieved so far.  
 
Food security, livelihoods  and resource poor farmers remain priority issues for our Group.  We, 
therefore, believe that low income and resource poor producers should continue to be supported 
through the preservation of Article 6.2 entitlements.  
 
On PSH we seek outcomes that effectiv ely address the difficulties of the Peace Clause, especially 
product and programme coverage until a permanent solution is agreed upon.  
 
On SSM, we believe that Members could agree on an interim decision that would make Special 
Safeguards usable by developi ng countries until a full fledge mechanism is instituted.  
 
Finally, on the domestic support pillar, we believe that Members should take meaningful reduction 
commitments for above de minimis  AMS. This will be a significant step forward towards addressing 
the historical imbalances in the Agreement on Agriculture and a positive move in levelling  the playing 
field. The Africa Group remains ready to discuss concrete proposals and solutions to addressing AMS 
above de minimis  at MC12  
 
Chair, on Cotton, the African  Group supports the C -4 proposals and urge Members to favourably 
consider their proposals for reform in this sector.  
 
The African Group has submitted its proposals on all these issues and we remain open to discuss 
our suggestions.  We are also working on te xtual amendments to the Chair 's text and we will make 
our submission soon.  
 
TRIPS Waiver  
 
Chair, it is almost one year since India and South Africa introduced document IP/C/W/669 on 15 - 
16 October 2020, requesting a waiver from certain provisions of the TR IPS Agreement for the 
prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19. 
 
What was feared happened - with millions of deaths, and we are faced with global socio -economic 
breakdown as national economies, especially small and developing ones, are under unpre cedented 
pressures.  For instance, the crash in international tourism due to the coronavirus pandemic is 
estimated to cause a loss of more than $4 trillion to the global GDP for the years 2020 and 2021.  
 
Unfortunately, we continue to discuss as people are d ying. We also note with concern that a handful 
of Members with high vaccination rates and abundant resources have refused to engage on the 
Waiver proposal. Africa with a dismal rate of 5% of COVID -19 vaccination, remain a very fertile 
ground for the incuba tion of new variants.  
 
Any protracted debate and inconclusive debate will only worsen the situation rather than address 
the shortage and inequitable distribution of vaccines.  If the WTO were to show the world that it is 
effectively contributing to address the pandemic, conclusion of the TRIPS waiver discussions at the 
earliest would be central.  
 
Special and Differential Treatment  
 
The Africa group underscores that SDT provisions should be strengthened and more precise, 
effective and operational.  With this in mind, the G90 presented its aspirations in document 
WT/GC/234 that was considered at the last General Council.  We further developed and submitted 
another comprehensive document, JOB/TNC/97, which was discussed at the last CTD -SS meeting in 
formal m ode on Friday 24 September.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 150 - 
 
   
The Group believes that the draft Ministerial Decision to be submitted by the G90 shortly would 
strengthen the rightful place of SDT as a fundamental pillar of the WTO.  We call on Members to 
continue engagement towards an MC12 outcome.  
 
E-commerce Work Programme  
 
Let me touch upon the concerns of the African group with regards to the digital divide which became 
apparent during the pandemic.  We have on many occasions mentioned that, unlike developed 
countries, Africa was unable t o adopt digital solutions to address the pandemic related challenges.  
We, therefore, reiterate our call for the reinvigoration of the 1998 Work Programme on Electronic 
Commerce. This will help us to come to grips with the multifaceted implications of the r apid advances 
in innovation and technologies in this area, and focussed consideration of the developmental 
challenges and opportunities that these present, especially for developing and least developed 
countries.  
 
Other Items  
 
Trade and Environment  
 
Chair, allow me to make a few remarks separately from the Group statement. I have heard several 
delegations referring to the issue of Trade and environment as an emerging issue.  
 
This issue has been at the WTO for a very long time. We are all concerned about the state of the 
environment and we all want to do what is best for the environmental sustainability. However it 
remains to be seen what is the nexus being proposed between trade and the environment and 
whether it will lead to the impositio n of standards that exceed what has been agreed upon 
multilaterally.  
 
Maritime Freight and Costs  
 
I wish to draw your attention Chair to an issue that is of strong concern to us with the Pandemic as 
background. This concerns the scarcity of maritime freigh t and escalating costs of such maritime 
freight with negative impact on our trade. The Ambassador of Mongolia and I were discussing 
whether to bring forward a declaration at MC 12 on this issue but I am uncertain as to what rules, 
if any, could be activate d to address this. In a conversation with the Ambassador of Singapore, he 
suggested a webinar.  
 
Drawing on the formidable manner in which you brought together, DG, the pharma industry with 
WTO and WHO to address the vaccines issue, I would request you to consider replicating this exercise 
on the issue of maritime freight to facilitate a conversation with Industry.  
 
7. Chile  
 
Director -General, please allow me to take the floor on behalf of Chile. Let me start on a positive 
note. The conclusion of the text -based discussions on domestic regulation is excellent news for the 
World Trade Organization (WTO), mainly because it was the result of the compromise and flexibility 
shown by two important Members. We should all follow their example! The e -commerce negotia tions 
have also gained momentum, including during the summer, and my recent report reflects the steady 
progress made in the investment facilitation talks. We expect tangible and ambitious results for the 
Twelfth Ministerial Conference (MC12). The positive developments in these joint initiatives should 
make us reflect on their advantages as a route to finding solutions to the economic challenges of 
the 21st century. More on this at the next meeting of the General Council.  
 
Having said that, we are concerned about the lack of progress and, in some cases, setbacks seen in 
certain critical areas of negotiation. This should also give us pause for thought.  
 
In the area of fisheries, we are grateful for Ambassador Wills' report and his tireless efforts to close 
gaps, attain convergence and find landing zones. However, his work is being hindered by a significant 
number of proposals that seek to alter the agreem ent architecture, distracting us from the purpose 
of these negotiations. We had understood and were relieved to have been repeatedly assured that WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 151 - 
 
  no one wishes to grant subsidies for unsustainable fishing. Unfortunately, a number of recent 
proposals seem t o indicate otherwise.  
 
At this point, when we are closer than ever to reaching an agreement, we cannot afford to reopen 
questions that have already been settled, nor put forward ideas that have been rejected in the past. 
Chile considers that a balance can be struck if the major subsidizers lead by example and commit to 
eliminating part of their subsidies, while the developing world undertakes to meet progressively the 
obligations contained in the text. The discussions should focus on the relationship betwee n 
Articles  5.1.1 and 5.5 to achieve this balance and get negotiations back on track. Looking for a 
technical draw where no one commits to anything in terms of fisheries subsidies would only punish 
future generations.  
 
In the area of agriculture, we appreci ate and support Ambassador Abraham's efforts. Her text, 
introduced before the summer break, is an honest contribution to sensitive negotiations, covering 
many pillars and in which we all have a stake. We consider the text to be a good basis for the 
negotia tions, although we would have liked some of the pillars to be more ambitious. There are also 
certain imbalances. However, the reaction of other Members was less positive and the positions of 
many groups became more intractable. We would reiterate that tran sparency alone is not sufficient 
for an agreement at MC12, nor is it a permanent solution to public stockholding (PSH).  
 
The third area that is a priority for November is Trade and Health. We will make our comments on 
this topic at the next meeting of the General Council.  
 
These three areas, together with WTO reform, are the key, priority areas that our Ministers should 
give due attention and take appropriate decisions. This is what they will be judged on.  
 
I would like to thank the Chair of the Special Ses sion of the Council for Trade in Services for her 
report. Any "outcome document" emanating from MC12 should mention trade in services. We invite 
all Members to consider the proposal by Chile and other Members (RD/SERV/156) as a basis for 
discussions. We tr ust in the Chair's leadership to achieve results.  
 
The process being carried out by the Chair of the General Council has given us some insight into 
what the Ministerial Declaration will look like, its context and political messages. We are moving in 
the ri ght direction. However, we must, on the one hand, expedite discussions based on a first draft 
of the Ministerial Declaration to be presented by the Chair, and, on the other hand, lower our 
expectations so that the draft does not become an overdressed Chris tmas tree that is impossible to 
manage and agree in the few weeks that are left.  
 
Chair, we have 62 working days before the start of the Ministerial Conference. We must prioritize 
our concerns and goals. We must refrain from repeating our positions and not  try to return to issues 
that have already been resolved. We must be realistic. For this delegation at least, we would prefer 
to have to explain in December why we achieved results only in some areas, rather than why we 
failed. Again.  
 
8. Bangladesh  
 
Madam  Chair, I thank you for convening the informal TNC meeting ahead of the GC meeting 
scheduled next week. I hope this will help review the negotiation process on various important trade 
issues and our overall preparation as we strive to achieve some tangible  outcomes at MC12. I would 
reiterate what you very often speak, if we want concrete outcomes, we have to maximize the very 
short time and optimize every little opportunity that we have at our disposal before MC12.   
Madam Chair,  
 
We thank the distinguished Chairs of the different negotiating groups for their comprehensive 
presentations on the status of negotiations in their respective areas. I cannot agree more that we 
need to make further progress in order to contribute to the deliverables of MC12 and there by 
strengthen the multilateral trading system.  
 
We echo the views of others that the text of fisheries subsidies needs to be balanced and we should 
strive to achieve that in the negotiation for reaching consensus taking due care of the concerns of 
the dev eloping countries, particularly of the LDCs. We have already done enough damage to our 
precious marine resources. If we want to save it from further deterioration, we need stronger WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 152 - 
 
  prohibition. We are of the view that reverse SDT under the current draft pr ovision under article 5.1.1 
would not be able to bring such strong a prohibition. Also, a single prohibition would be unable to 
serve the purpose of the entire Membership as they are at different levels of development.  
 
We must limit our debates within the  mandate, as my delegation earlier has emphasized. We need 
to be constructive, pragmatic, flexible and solution -focused as DG has just mentioned, if we want to 
have the fisheries subsidy as a possible deliverable of the MC12. Any deviation will make things  
complicated.  
 
Madam Chair, as you are aware, the LDC group has a submission regarding a draft MC decision on 
Graduation under consideration by the General Council seeking extension of LDC specific S&DT and 
other support measures for a certain period after  graduation. We have noted with thanks that 
Members largely support this call of the LDCs.  We are most thankful to delegations who we met in 
the past few weeks for their support, sympathy, and suggestion to advance this proposal.  The LDC 
group is working o n the inputs and suggestions. We are also grateful to the GC Chair Ambassador 
Dacio Castillo for his informal consultations with different groups and individual delegations. We 
hope that Members will favourably consider this submission as an achievable out come for the 
forthcoming MC.   
 
Madam Chair, COVID 19 pandemic is continuing its devastation around the world with 2nd/ 3rd 
waves, and we are not sure when we will have a respite. Some countries are opening their economies 
with substantial progress in vaccination, whereas most others are  struggling to control the pandemic 
with very little or no vaccine coverage. This unequal and inequitable situation with regard to 
vaccination is not going to secure us as nobody is safe, if everybody is not safe. The production and 
distribution of vaccine s, therapeutics, and other medical equipment necessary for prevention, 
containment, and treatment of COVID -19 should be available to all, irrespective of who we are, 
where we are. In the immediate term, we need to scale up vaccine production through sharin g of 
technology and formulas with those pharmaceutical industries who have the capacity to produce 
vaccines located in various parts of the world.  
 
We appreciate the vaccine donation initiatives by some Members; however, we should also admit 
that supply o f left-over vaccines and donation cannot be a sustainable solution to this pandemic. 
Without scaling up production of the vaccine and diversifying their distribution globally on an urgent 
basis we cannot stop the virus. Time is the essence.  
 
We welcome yo ur role, Madam DG, in brining important stakeholders including WHO across the table 
to discuss possible way forward. We want to see tangible progress. In our view, TRIPS or any other 
instruments should not hinder unconditional, affordable, equitable and ti mely access to medical 
advances made in fighting this deadly virus. Therefore, we would like to see completion in the 
negotiations of the waiver proposal at the TRIPS Council. We thank Ambassador Walker for his 
informal consultations with different groups and individual delegations to find an early outcome.  
 
Finally, we look forward to working closely with all Members and engaging constructively in all the 
pending negotiations in the coming days.  
 
9. Australia (Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Comm erce and CAIRNS Group)  
 
I will first provide a report on work under the Joint Statement Initiative on Electronic Commerce on 
behalf of the co -convenors: Australia, Japan and Singapore .  
  
Momentum in the negotiations remains strong. Since our last report in July, we have held one 
plenary meeting on 13 September, at which two further articles on which convergence had been 
reached were welcomed – on Online Consumer Protection and Open Governm ent Data. These are 
high-standard texts reflecting the perspectives of a wide group of developed and developing 
countries, which will deliver important benefits for consumers and business. This takes the total 
number of articles on which we have reached co nvergence to six.  
  
The meeting also featured a constructive discussion on options for capacity building and technical 
assistance under the initiative.  
  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 153 - 
 
  We issued an updated consolidated negotiating text on 8 September, which captures the good 
progress we have made so far. It contains around 20 per cent fewer square brackets than the 
consolidated text we issued in December last year.  
  
The JSI remains open, transparent and inclusive: meetings are open to all WTO Members and papers 
are available on the W TO portal.  
  
I look forward to more good progress in the initiative as we approach MC12.  
 
10. Australia  
 
The coming Ministerial Conference is like no other given the twin challenges we face: the once -in-a-
century health crisis that has impacted on us ext ernally, and the longest pause in rule -making in the 
history of this organisation, which has brought into relief the challenges we face internally.  
 
Our sense of collective responsibility must rise to respond to these twin challenges.  
 
This Delegation is of the view that we can – and must – make progress on a package that responds 
to the global community 's expectations of us: to keep supply of vaccines and their inputs open during 
this pandemic, to promote the sustainability of fish stocks in  our ocean and to promote global food 
security and sustainability through agricultural subsidy reform.  
 
The MC12 trade and health package should include an outcome on the ongoing intellectual property 
discussions; a political declaration addressing issues such as transparency, trade facilitation and 
export restrictions; and an agreement to carry forward work after MC12, to ensure we are better 
prepared for the next crisis.  
 
And as Ministers of the Cairns Group have been saying throughout this year, for the food security of 
the people, particularly those in developing countries, and for the sustainability of our planet we can 
and must set out meaningful parameters for a negotiation to tackle the scourge of agricultural 
subsidies, which, as the report to the U N Food Systems Summit has noted, now totals over half a 
trillion dollars.  
 
Chair: it is now evident that our plurilateral negotiations are likely to deliver a big contribution to 
the success of MC12.  We have a major opportunity to conclude the first of the  Joint Statement 
Initiatives launched at our last Ministerial Conference, that on services domestic regulation.  Services 
was the fastest growing area of world trade before the pandemic, and it is the sector that is most 
likely to help lead us economically in the recovery.  On this negotiation we are very close indeed.  
Should we succeed, we will have given this organisation a major boost in revitalising its rule -making 
function.  
 
We hope the same can be said in our multilateral negotiations. The window is nar rowing. We should 
make no mistake: this is a critical moment for the future of multilateral rule -making. We therefore 
need to be cognisant of the significance of the moment, and ensure we rise to it with a sense of 
collective responsibility.  
 
11. Norway  
 
Thank you, DG, for your report, your sobering assessment, and your strong message. Thanks also 
to the negotiating chairs for their reports and efforts.  
 
The next two months will be critical and show whether WTO Members can deliver credible and 
substantive outcomes at MC12. This is in particular true in the area of fisheries subsidies where we 
are entering the final lap in a long, hard marathon.   
 
We have heard many voices at the Public Forum urging us on. Pointing to the importance of the 
agreement and questioning how we can do anything with any other environmentally related 
agreement if we can 't do fish subsidies. We still believe that an agreement is doable - doable now - 
and that the Chair's draft text contains realistic landing zones for a deal.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 154 - 
 
  Getting to a deal will require all sides to compromise, and as you said, DG, negotiating is a fine art. 
It also reminds me of an old hand in this house that used to say that "negotiations are about 
adjusting expectations ".  
 
From our perspective a balanced de al should target the largest fishing nations, while providing more 
lenient disciplines for the smaller fishing nations. To make the deal credible, the top 25 fishing 
nations in the Membership plus all developed country Members will have to adhere fully to the 
disciplines,  where the disciplines for overcapacity and overfishing will be of particular importance. 
All Members in this group will have to ensure and be able to demonstrate that their subsidies do no 
harm.  
 
At the same time, we need to accommodate th e smallest fisheries nations ' request for more lenient 
disciplines. We support the ACP request for a de minimis exception  from the main prohibition of 
subsidies that can contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, without conditionality.  
 
A de minimis  of less than 0,8% of global catch adds up to less than 13% of global catch but covers 
some 70 developing country Members. Looking at the FAO statistics, even with these developing 
country Members increasing their capacity to fish sustainably, for most it will  take a long time to 
exceed the de minimis. For those who do exceed the de minimis as some point in time, they should 
be able to attain the capacity to demonstrate sustainable fishing, as required by 5.1.1 and 
transparency commitments.  
 
In our view, a bala nced approach to special and differential treatment for overcapacity and 
overfishing could consist of the following elements: an exception for LDCs; a de minimis for a large 
group of developing country Members as just described; some transitional time for those larger 
fishing nations who need it for the purpose of attaining the capacity to demonstrate that their 
subsidies are sustainable, and; a 12 nautical mile exception.  
 
On another point, let me underline that no subsidies - whether from large or small fishing nations, 
developed or developing - should be granted to fishing and fishing related activities in unregulated 
areas , that is in the high seas outside RFMOs and EEZs. This is precautionary. This is needed. This 
is a minimum for our disciplines . 
 
If we finish this marathon together, we will have contributed positively to the sustainability of the 
world 's fisheries resources and to the sustainability of the livelihood of the people and communities 
who depend on those resources. Each of us will have to contribute, but we will all benefit in the 
longer term, and we will all be satisfied that we were able to  cross the finishing line.  
 
Before concluding, let me also make a few comments on agriculture , an area of great importance to 
Norway.  
 
We believe that a result that includes export restrictions, export competition, transparency, and a 
balanced work progr am with a realistic level of ambition should be within reach. A realistic level of 
ambition means that we should not attempt to short -cut negotiations by including numerical targets 
in a work program.  
 
Furthermore, we have noted with concern that the July  text from the CoA -SS Chair does not include 
any reference to non -trade concerns. Any future -oriented work program must take Member 's 
sensitivities and non -trade concerns into account.  
 
Finally, let me assure you, Chair, that Norway will continue to engag e constructively in our collective 
search for a way forward towards a balanced outcome, in fisheries subsidies, in agriculture and in 
any other issue before us.   
 
Sixty-one days and counting.  
 
12. European Union  
Thank you, Madame Chair, for convening this  meeting at this crucial time. We are less than sixty -
one days from MC12, and seriously concerned that on the key multilateral files, there are few signals 
of convergence. On the contrary, positions are becoming more entrenched.  And in some ways, there 
are attempts to even move backwards. A failed Ministerial is therefore a real possibility. The WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 155 - 
 
  European Union therefore urges all Members to come together and try to identify landing zones on 
the key files, to ensure an outcome that demonstrates a common willingness to make the WTO 
relevant for 21st century challenges. We need to achieve this by being realistic and reasonable.  
Starting with fisheries subsidies, the E uropean Union wants to reach a multilateral agreement 
ensuring sustainability. It is  a challenging task and time is running out.  
The EU is ready to engage to build consensus and to find middle ground. The Chair 's text should be 
the basis for negotiations. We call on everyone to seek to accept compromises and create a basis 
for convergenc e, rather than divergence, in the coming weeks.  
We commend Ambassador Wills for his efforts and forcing us to work extra hard with a busy schedule 
of meetings.  
Moving on to  actions and commitments that the WTO can take in response to the current and any 
future pandemic , I want to recall Ambassador Walker 's process and the aim to achieve a meaningful 
outcome on health in MC12. Essential elements of the Trade and Health Initiative should be included 
in the outcome, as they are very relevant.  
During the Gener al Council meeting next week, Ambassador Walker will make a report of his 
consultations. We hope he will draft a text of a declaration on the WTO response to the pandemic, 
which should focus on the essential elements that are central to the pandemic.  
The European Union is also proactively engaging in the discussions on how intellectual property can 
contribute to our common goal of ensuring global equitable access to COVID -19 vaccines and 
medicines. We have tabled a proposal that builds on existing flexibil ities in the TRIPS Agreement. 
We have also said that we are ready to listen and consider additional ways of facilitating compulsory 
licensing beyond the concrete ideas that we have put forward. Discussions in the TRIPS Council are 
challenging, to say the l east, and we must find areas of convergence on the points that can deliver 
results in the short term. This should be our priority.  
Turning to agriculture, the E uropean Union remains of the view that focus and prioritisation of a set 
of issues would increa se the chances of successful outcomes.  
We think a food security focused package for MC12, including a set of issues, is within reach and the 
European Union will continue working with Members in that direction.  
The European Union will engage constructivel y in the text -based process that Ambassador Peralta 
envisages starting next week.  
Finally, it is essential that MC12 sees progress on the dispute settlement reform that will address 
the current Appellate Body situation and deliver a fully functioning disp ute settlement in the WTO . 
It is a matter of credibility for the WTO itself.  WTO Members all have a shared responsibility to 
resolve this issue as soon as possible.  
It is also clear also that it would not be realistic to expect concrete outcomes or solutions by MC12. 
However, a lack of any progress concerning one of the core functions of the WTO would cast doubt 
on the credibility of the reform agenda and of the WTO itself.  
Our expectation would therefore be that we would converge by MC12 on a time -limited work 
programme to agree on a package of reforms of the WTO dispute settlement system. This process 
would focus on issues that need to be resolved to overcome the impasse in  which we find ourselves 
today. The objective would be to have a fully functioning dispute settlement system within a defined 
time-period (no later than by MC13).  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 156 - 
 
  13. Singapore  
 
Thank you Chair. In your notification of 8 September 2021, you urged Members to do three things, 
namely, (a) collectively re -engage on the substance (b) assess where we are and (c) express the 
way forward. In this vein, let me address these three questions. First, where are we now? The short 
answer is that we are not in a pretty sp ot. As you have rightly pointed out, MC12 is effectively less 
than six weeks away and the COVID -19 pandemic has introduced unprecedented challenges. 
However, Members remain divided and far apart on all the key issues, particularly on fisheries 
subsidies, a griculture, and the WTO response to the pandemic. Similarly, Members continue to hold 
divergent views on other important issues like the moratorium on custom duties on electronic 
transmissions and restoration of the Appellate Body. In other words, there is  so much to do in so 
little time. Hence, it is imperative that Members focus on substance rather than form. This brings us 
neatly to the second question, which is "How do we collectively reengage on the substance? ".  
 
I would suggest three things. One, Mem bers must discard rhetoric and polemics and focus on the 
substance. There is just no time to play to the gallery at home or to engage in megaphone 
negotiations.  
 
Two, Members must come to the negotiating table with a "give-and-take" mindset, rather than 
pursuing a "I-must-win-at-all-costs" approach. In other words, while we should pursue our national 
interests, we must refrain from doing so at the expense of collective interests.  
 
Three, it is time for Members to lay down our cards on the table. This is n ot possible in a room with 
164 Members. Hence, I would urge the Director -General to convene consultations in a format that 
allow Members to engage in candid and meaningful discussions in order to bridge gaps and find 
landing zones. Third, what should be th e substance of Members ' collective re -engagement?  
 
Allow me to make three suggestions. One, given the unfolding pandemic, it is clear that most, if not 
all Members agree that the WTO must deliver a substantive outcome in response to the COVID -19 
pandemic.  Hence, this should naturally be our top priority in order to demonstrate that the WTO can 
make a meaningful contribution to the global efforts to tackle the pandemic and support post -
pandemic recovery. Since the onset of the pandemic, many initiatives hav e been placed on the table 
for Members ' consideration, including the Ottawa Group 's Trade and Health Initiative (TAHI) which 
has garnered support from more than 50 Members. Of course, there are other proposals, including 
the TRIPS Waiver proposal; the EU 's proposal on Urgent Trade Policy Responses; the US ' proposal 
on Disaster Preparedness and Resiliency Action Plan and the compilation contained in document 
RD/GC/14 arising from broad consultations with Members. The challenge is to bring all these threads 
together, which must be the goal of the Facilitator -led process under Ambassador David Walker 's 
leadership. There are many valuable ideas contained in all these proposals, but given the short run -
way to MC12, Members ' priority should be to identify those el ements that are pragmatic and capable 
of garnering broad support. Members must avoid using the WTO response to the pandemic as a 
Christmas tree to hang our national ornaments. In short, our objective is to start building 
convergence on those elements that Members can agree with.  
 
Two, we should push the "Joint Statement on Agriculture Export Prohibitions or Restrictions Relating 
to the World Food Programme (WFP) " across the finish line. At the December 2020 General Council, 
we were very close to securing c onsensus on this important issue. At that time, we knew that one 
of the immediate impact of the COVID -19 pandemic was on communities ' access to their daily food 
supplies. Sadly, the situation has not changed much this year. Many communities remain vulnerab le 
to the economic shocks and severe supply chain disruptions. We need to work together to push for 
a multilateral outcome this time, which will send a strong signal and make a meaningful contribution 
towards the Sustainable Development Goal 2.0 (SDG) on "Zero Hunger ".  
 
Three, Members should maintain the moratorium on custom duties on electronic transmissions. At 
a time when digitalisation has become more important than ever due to the pandemic, the WTO 
risks being seen as anachronistic if Members refuse t o maintain the moratorium. Micro, small and 
medium enterprises (MSMEs) and women entrepreneurs have also been riding on the digitalisation 
wave to cut business cost and expand into new markets. Any failure to extend the moratorium at 
this point when e -comm erce is booming will inevitably send a wrong signal to the businesses and 
industry, particularly, MSMEs, who have relied on digital platforms for survival during these difficult 
times. Chair, we must be realistic and focussed as we approach MC12. Let us ai m to deliver what 
we can for MC12, and prepare a road -map, including work programmes, that will allow us to chart WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 157 - 
 
  the journey forward. As always, Singapore stands ready to do whatever we can to secure substantive 
MC12 outcomes that will lay the foundation for a stronger and better WTO.  
 
14. South Africa  
 
DG, thanks for a comprehensive report. The reports from the Chairs are indeed sobering. We align 
ourselves with the statements delivered by Jamaica and Mauritius on behalf of the ACP and African 
groups. I thank the Chair of the Negotiating Groups for their reports and efforts.  
 
COVID -19 response  
 
The COVID -19 pandemic has taken an immense social and economic toll and continues to persist. 
With the emergence of a K shaped recovery, developing count ries and LDCs are facing the brunt of 
it. Vaccine inequality is a major contributor with the total cost of delayed vaccinations – in terms of 
lost income – being estimated to amount to $9 trillion. The only way to address this inequality and 
arrest the pan demic is to ramp up and diversify production.  
 
This delegation attaches great importance to a WTO response to the pandemic and this is urgent. 
We are approaching a full year since the TRIPS waiver proposal was submitted. Delays in removing 
barriers to the expansion and diversification of production have a human cost.  The WTO Membership 
has a unique opportunity to demonstrate solidarity and reaffirm the relevance of the multilateral 
trading system in addressing common challenges. We urge the Membership to se ize this moment. 
We believe it is possible to find an outcome that will include both the TRIPS Waiver and EU CL 
proposal. We remain positive that in the interest of humanity, the WTO Membership can rise above 
the differences and this requires that we chang e gears to a solution mode towards diversifying 
production across the world. The issue of vaccine inequity also poses risks for an inclusive MC12. 
We look forward to the Information session.  
 
South Africa has participated constructively in the facilitator led process led by Ambassador Walker 
on a WTO response to the pandemic, however the exercise will be incomplete without addressing IP 
barriers. The Facilitator and TRIPS Council Chair processes must be aligned if the WTO is to deliver 
an outcom e. The TRIPS Waiver is integral to a successful outcome at MC12.  
 
Agriculture  
 
Turning to agriculture, we maintain our view that disciplines on Trade Distorting Domestic Support 
require reform; the longstanding injustice in the area of Cotton remains a con cern; a permanent 
solution for Public Stockholding is a necessity and progress in the discussions on SSM is key. The 
outcome cannot be limited to transparency and a Work Programme.  We are disappointed that the 
Chair`s text has not accommodated our issues. We need to identify a realistic food security and 
livelihoods package that would signal WTO`s commitment to agriculture reform, set the path for the 
negotiations that addresses the concerns and sensitivities of all. It must respond to the current 
context o f historical imbalances in domestic support, including concentration of support and 
recognize the disproportionate impact of the pandemic on developing countries.  A decision on WFP 
is possible if aligned to the ACP and Africa Group proposals. We underscore  that S&D that preserves 
policy space for development must be integral to any outcome on agriculture, including under 
Art 6.2. The outcome must respect Ministerial mandates.  
 
Fisheries subsidies  
 
With regard to fisheries subsidies, we remain concerned abou t imbalances in the text. The biggest 
threat to marine sustainability is large scale and industrial fishing. Subsidization of these activities 
must be addressed if the instrument we are negotiating is to have any credibility. The emergence of 
a text which provides loopholes allowing the biggest subsidizers to continue to subsidize, while 
narrowing the scope for S&Ds to developing countries would not satisfy our mandate nor would it 
enhance the credibility of this institution. Appropriate and effective S&DT for developing countries 
and LDCs in the form of policy space to facilitate the responsible development of the fisheries sectors 
in developing countries and LDCs is key. The joint ACP/AG proposal provides a good basis for a 
discussion. We will continue to engage constructively in the negotiations.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 158 - 
 
  Special and differential treatment  
 
S&D is a treaty embedded right and remains important in ensuring fair and equitable outcomes in 
the WTO. The CTD -SS must deliver on its mandate on the G90 ASPs if we are to mov e forward. This 
requires constructive engagement by all Members to find an amicable solution that addresses the 
concerns of all.  
 
E-Commerce  
 
On e-commerce, we reiterate our position on the Work Programme and the e -commerce moratorium. 
We believe that mul tilaterally mandated work is the Work programme and the outcome on the e -
commerce moratorium at MC12 will depend on clarifications with regard to the scope and definition 
of ET. We have submitted a paper with India on the moratorium to the GC and we look f orward to 
engaging with Members. We re -iterate our position on the TRIPS NVC moratorium, in particular that 
it must be treated on its own merit, independently of the e -commerce moratorium.  
 
Dispute settlement  
 
The two -tier dispute settlement mechanism is a  key tenet of the WTO and a fundamental contribution 
to the rules based multilateral trading system. We must restore the functionality of the AB. We must 
also recognize that the dysfunctionality of the WTO is not limited to the AB, but also in its inabilit y 
to deliver on multilaterally agreed mandates.  
 
WTO reform  
 
In relation to WTO reform, WTO reform must be inclusive, take into account interests of all, 
particularly interests of poorest economies, developing countries and LDCs for sustainability and 
legitimacy . It must therefore be premised on the principles of inclusivity and development  with a 
view to create a fair and equitable MTS.  
 
In conclusion, we believe Members must continue to reflect on the "The Legal status of JSIs and 
their negotiated outcomes ", this is an important issue in the context of a rules -based system.  
 
15. Tunisia  
 
Let me begin by thanking you, Madam Director -Gener al, for your comprehensive report, your candid 
assessment and your thoughtful suggestions on the way forward for a successful MC12. We also 
appreciate your unwavering commitment since your appointment to promoting the role of the WTO 
in addressing vaccine inequalities and rebuilding a more inclusive multilateral trading system that 
meets the needs of the people it serves. Our greetings also go to the chairs of the negotiating bodies 
for their commendable reports and efforts.  
 
Madam Chair, while developed co untries are, fortunately, beginning to see the light at the end of 
the tunnel of this health crisis and have embarked on an economic recovery, thanks in particular to 
sustained vaccination rates, LDCs and many developing countries are in the midst of a ser ious health 
situation with countless economic and social consequences, which is being exacerbated by the lack 
of much -needed global solidarity.  
 
However, engaging in collective thinking on an effective and fair WTO response to strengthen the 
global supply chain for medical products and vaccines remains a key shared responsibility. If we had 
to keep only one outcome of MC12, this would, indeed, be the one to retain.  
 
We welcome, in this respect, the initiatives concluded between international organizations, including 
the WTO, in this area and we reiterate the steadfast commitment of Tunisia to making the most of 
its productive capacity in the pharmaceutical industry.  
 
The second priority area is fisheries subsidies. This exercise, while laudable, has proven t o be 
complex and complicated over time, despite the consistent efforts of Ambassador Wills.  
 
In fact, in the ongoing negotiations, many Members, particularly the most vulnerable, are finding 
that the Chair's text is struggling at this stage to target the k ey causes that continue to undermine WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 159 - 
 
  the sustainability of fisheries, and to identify effective, efficient, enforceable and, above all, fair 
disciplines.  
 
The hybrid approach, which should be the solution, has held Members in a vicious circle between 
unlim ited flexibility of sustainable management measures, advocating the status quo, and 
untargeted S&DT impacting on sustainability.  
 
An effective compromise can only be found in the middle ground, given that the mandate was clearly 
sympathetic towards real po licy space considerations for some developing countries and LDCs, 
consistent with the objective of sustainability and durability of the sector.  
 
We regret at this stage that the discussions in recent weeks on Articles 5, 8 and 1.2 have continued 
to ignore the demands of small fishing nations, and that the text continues to treat them in the same 
way as the major world producers. This lack of consideration can only delay, if not compromise, the 
achievement of a consensus.  
 
This same observation can also be e xtended to the negotiations on agriculture, the third priority of 
MC12. For, in spite of the remarkable efforts of Ambassador Abraham Peralta and the facilitators to 
move to text -based negotiations, which we welcome, we regret that the current version of t he text 
fails to take into consideration a good number of the proposals submitted, particularly those from 
the African Group, whose latest communications largely sum up the ambitions of developing 
countries in these negotiations.  
 
We are hopeful that an ea rly revision of the text would give us more confidence in our expectations 
of a successful outcome at MC12.  
Madam Chair,  
 
While agreeing with other Members on the concerns and expectations in other areas, notably 
electronic commerce, dispute settlement and  WTO reform, my delegation is aware that choices will 
have to be made quickly as to the significant outcomes to be achieved by MC12 and what is likely 
to happen in the future.  
 
16. Jamaica (ACP)  
 
The ACP Group thanks you for your report. We also thank the Chairs of the WTO negotiating groups 
and Ambassador Walker for their reports.  
We are 8 weeks away from MC12 and a lot of work remains to be done to put our Ministers in a 
position to conclude negotiations in some areas and set out the parameters for ou r future work in 
other areas.  
 
I will outline the priorities of the ACP Group, accordingly.  
 
Fisheries Subsidies  
 
Chair, I begin with fisheries subsidies. The ACP Group remains fully committed to an outcome on 
fisheries subsidies by MC12. For our Members, an agreement would complement other national, 
regional and multilateral efforts in addressing the challenges of IUU fishing and overfishing and 
overcapacity. In so doing, it is important that we target major subsidizers and large -scale industrial 
fishing, as well as prevent loopholes to be exploited by those targeted. We are pleased that progress 
has been made in the negotiations and our Group is making a contribution.  
 
We recently submitted, together with the African Group, a proposal to the NGR looking a t how to 
balance the Chair 's text in line with the requests from a vast majority of the 104 Ministers who spoke 
at the 15th July meeting. We heard Ministers reiterating that we adhere to the mandate of MC11. 
Particularly, we take note that Ministers have r uled out the option of special and differential 
treatment being limited to artisanal and small -scale fishing or transition period with technical 
assistance with capacity building. Our proposal seeks to accomplish these objectives. Additionally, 
the proposa l encompasses Ministers ' call for S&DT in the form of policy space to facilitate the 
responsible development of the fisheries sectors in developing countries and LDCs. We look forward 
to the Chair 's circulation of a revised and balanced text that reflects the elements of our proposal.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 160 - 
 
  Agriculture  
 
On agriculture, the ACP Group takes note of the Chair 's text in JOB/AG/215. The text does not have 
all the elements that would allow for Members to begin text -based negotiations. We have always 
maintaine d that the elimination of AMS above de minimis should be a first step in the implementation 
of reforms. We have to level the playing field. We have also consistently called for the removal of 
Article 6.2 from reduction commitments, tightening of green box disciplines to prevent box -shifting, 
as well as S&DT for developing countries, LDCs, SVEs and NFIDCs. These elements are not properly 
reflected in the text.  
 
We believe more work is needed on the propositions for SSM and PSH, which are, in addition to 
domestic support, of keen interest to the ACP Group. MC12 provides us with an opportunity to 
complete our work on a Decision for the World Food Programme purchases. We recently made a 
submission to the CoA -ss looking at the nexus between COVID -19 and the nego tiations, which we 
believe can contribute to bringing balance to the text. We expect a revised and balanced text which 
could be a basis for commencing text -based negotiations. We will contribute constructively.  
 
Services  
 
MC12 provides an opportunity for t he WTO to play an important role in bolstering the resilience of 
the services sector in developing countries and LDCs. As is well known, the services sector is 
significantly impacted by the pandemic. we have made a submission outlining the key issues for u s. 
In that context, engagement in accordance with the mandate and consistent with GATS Article XIX, 
especially as it relates to the in -built flexibilities for developing and least developed countries will be 
critical. The ACP Group supports the inclusion o f a paragraph in the MC12 outcome document for 
our work going forward post -MC12 on services.  The Group has put forward suggested language in 
the CTS -SS in that regard.  
 
Ecommerce  
 
As it relates to the ecommerce moratorium, we need to continue discussions o n issues surrounding 
the moratorium as well as issues relating to the digital divide. We are working on technical papers 
on various issues. We need to focus on how we can reinvigorate the Work Programme given our 
specific interest on the development aspect s and challenges of this longstanding area of work in the 
multilateral framework of the WTO. We believe that MC12 provides an avenue to pursue these 
objectives.  
 
Development  
 
Special and differential treatment is a fundamental pillar of the WTO and should not be dispensed 
with in current nor future agreements. We believe that an outcome for MC12 based on, inter alia, 
the G90 proposals would assist our national efforts to stabilize our trade imbalances, including those 
arising from the COVID -19 pandem ic, build back better and successfully integrate into the global 
economy and global trading system. We therefore call for constructive engagements on this file.  
 
Intellectual Property  
 
Chair, our Members do not have equitable access to vaccines, which is c onsidered the ost durable 
solution to address the impact of COVID -19. At the same time, there are Members in possession of 
more than required to innoculate their entire population. With this in mind, we have already seen 
an emergence of measures prohibitin g entry of unvaccinnated people in some economies. We will 
be disproportionately affected because our economies are highly dependent on international trade, 
and our nationals, including those who travel to provide services. The WTO has an important role to  
play in facilitating swift, timely, affordable and equitable access to the vaccines and therapeutics to 
combat the pandemic .  
 
We have consistently supported the general objectives of the TRIPS Waiver proposal. A TRIPS waiver 
arrangement that accommodates  the interests and addresses the concerns of the Membership 
should be a priority for an MC12 outcome. This is an important element of the WTO 's response to 
the impact of the pandemic. We must resolve the issue of access. If agreed, an appropriate waiver 
arrangement would certainly improve our capacity to address future pandemics and unforeseen WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 161 - 
 
  crisis appropriately and help to limit all type of casualties we are enduring due to various bottlenecks 
that limit access to the vaccines.  
 
WTO's response to COVID -19 
 
We take note of ongoing work in various formats on the WTO 's response to the impact of the COVID -
19 pandemic. It is important that the WTO complement other international stakeholders in 
responding to the impact of the pandemic. The Covid 19 pandemic is an unprecedented crisis and 
requires a multidimensional and mu lti sectoral approach to pull together their expertise to 
complement each other in our drive to assist Members especially the vulnerable and those most in 
need. We have been following the discussions and we await the Facilitator 's text on the work done 
to date on this issue. It is important that the WTO 's response puts development at the centre of its 
focus, including the issue of trade debt and finance, especially for our MSMEs, as they are the most 
impacted by this pandemic. MSMEs is undeniably key to sal vage unemployment and address 
poverty. The WTO 's reponse to the pandemic should also provide an opportunity for Members to 
have a blueprint to deal with future events with COVID -19-like impact. We will contribute to the 
Facilitator 's work with a view to ha ving a decision for Minister 's approval at MC12.  
 
WTO Reform  
 
On Reform, the ACP Group reiterates that the process should be undergirded by the principles of 
inclusivity, fairness, transparency and equity, and must strike the right balance in respect of 
Members ' rights and obligations. It must advance the interests of developing countries and LDCs 
through the application of differential and more favourable treatment, including the retention of 
S&DT. It should also seek to ensure trade functions, at all time s, as an instrument for raising 
standards of living and employment, and for promoting sustainable development in line with the 
principles of the Marrakesh Agreement. Looking towards MC12, the ACP Group continues to prioritize 
the restoration of the proper functioning of the two -tier Dispute Settlement System. Ministers should 
also be presented with a Reform Work Programme consistent with the principles that we have 
outlined.  
 
In closing, Chair, we look forward to these development issues encapsulated by an outcome package 
for MC 12.  We will engage positively and do so in a solution -seeking mode.  We would like to point 
out that the integrity of the process(es) undertaken towards MC12 outcomes will matter as much as 
the substance. The crafting of an MC12 packa ge should, thus be done in a transparent, fair, balanced 
and development -oriented manner. Resolving these issues by MC12 is critical to our stabilization 
and rebuilding efforts in light of the COVID -19 impact on our trade capacity and development goals.  
 
17. Kingdom of Saudi Arabia (Arab Group)  
 
I am delivering this statement on behalf of the Arab Group. Madam Chairperson, the Arab Group 
would like to thank you Madam Director General for your report including your assessment and 
suggestions to Members on th e way forward. Let me also extends our thanks to the Chairs of 
Negotiating Bodies for their reports and assessments.  
 
In the coming days before MC12, we need more than ever to intensify our efforts and to engage in 
a solution -oriented mode with the sense o f urgency and necessary flexibility to achieve a consensus 
that lead to positive outcomes for MC12.  
 
Looking ahead towards MC12, allow me to highlight the Arab Group views on some certain areas 
that we see as priorities for MC12:  
 
The first one is COVID -19 pandemic and the vaccines. The Arab Group believes that , the WTO can 
play an important role in ensuring the global supply chain of critical medical products and in making 
the vaccines available for all Members in need. We emphasi ze the importance of equitable worldwide 
access to COVID -19 vaccines for economic growth and trade to bounce back from the pandemic, 
especially in developing and least developed countries.  
 
We urge countries to come together and avoid the temptation of 'vaccine nationalism ', because the 
health of people and the economy will not be safe until everyone, everywhere has access to the tools 
necessary to end this pandemic. We commend all recent cal ls and initiatives reached between 
international organizations including WTO to enhance their support to Members battling COVID -19. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 162 - 
 
   
The second area is fisheries subsidies; We believe that the July Ministerial meeting provided us with 
the necessary politic al guidance on how to move forward with this important issue. We believe that 
the instructions provided by our Ministers during that meeting should be taken as the basis of our 
work to narrow the gap of differences and to find common ground and landing zon es, in order to 
generate consensus before MC12. We also think that, allowing more policy space for developing 
Members to develop their domestic fisheries in these negotiations will lead to a successful conclusion. 
Moreover, we recognize that small -scale an d artisanal fishing are crucial for millions of the people in 
the world. Therefore, there must be horizontal exclusion of artisanal and small -scale fishing without 
geographical limit for all Members whether they are demanders or not.  
 
The third are is Agr iculture, we welcome the Chair 's recent report in which she outlined the contours 
of a possible deal on agricultural trade in the run -up to the 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12). We 
think it represented an accurate assessment of the situation. We also emp hasize the urgency of 
achieving progress at MC12 and encourage all Members to engage constructively in the technical 
discussions in order to achieve a successful outcome on this crucial issue.  
 
The fourth area is the WTO reform. We believe that an active engagement, a strong political will and 
a full understanding of the scope and elements of proposed reform are required to advance WTO 
reform. We also underscore the importance of a well -functioning Dispute Settlement Body. We 
therefore encourage all Member s to double their efforts to find ways to restore the proper functioning 
of the WTO dispute settlement system.  
 
In the area of accession to the WTO: Accession to the WTO can present a window of opportunity to 
acceding countries to integrate beneficially in to the global economy. The Arab region is one of the 
areas of the world with the largest number of countries outside the multilateral trading system. Of 
the 22 members of the Arab League, 13 countries are WTO Members and eight countries are in the 
process of accession. We hope that MC12 should be an opportunity to deliver in this area to ensure 
more universality of the organization, particularly for those who still in the process of accession. We 
also underline that the accession of LDCs should be conducted  under a "fast track " approach  
 
In conclusion, the Arab Group stands ready to work constructively with WTO Members towards 
successful outcomes at MC12.  
 
18. New Zealand  
 
New Zealand remains focused on multilateral deliverables for MC12 as part of broader efforts to 
reinvigorate the WTO 's negotiating function and strengthen the implementation of existing rules so 
that Members can respond effectively to contemporary issues of global concern. As we have said 
before, we continue to believe our multilateral foc us between now and November should be on three 
outcomes: finishing fisheries subsidies, responding to the pandemic, and setting a meaningful path 
forward on agriculture. It is crucial that we conclude meaningful fisheries subsidies disciplines by 
MC12.  
 
We must finish these negotiations to support our shared sustainability, and SDG mandated, 
objectives. Following Ministers ' engagement in July, this will enable WTO Members to deliver to our 
Leaders who gave us the SDG mandate and to our stakeholders who exp ect an outcome after two 
decades of work. Most importantly, it is required for the sustainable future you spoke of Director 
General. The NGR Chair reported that he is concerned with the dynamics of the negotiation and that 
concerns me. Ambassador Wills has  established a crucial process of text based  engagement, and we 
ask all Members to engage constructively to take the text forward effectively over the coming weeks. 
Resolving the way that the overcapacity and overfishing pillar intersects with SDT should b e the 
focus of our work. The Chair 's text represents no Member 's ideal outcome, but reflects years of 
technical and negotiating effort, and compromise from all sides. In this spirit, as Ambassador Wills 
said, we must apply a solutions focused lens to what is on the table now, including through any new 
proposals put forward. Only this will enable us to reach the necessary landing zones in the short 
time we have left.  
 
Concerning the second of those three outcomes, I will be reporting to the General Council next week 
on the work I am personally doing as Facilitator on the WTO 's response to the pandemic. It is also 
crucial that we deliver a meaningful outcome on agriculture. As other Members are saying, a 
meaningful outcome on domestic support means a concrete  way forward that puts us on the right WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 163 - 
 
  path to ensure we deliver on domestic support reform. That path must include a timebound 
measurable commitment to launch negotiations with the aim of capping and reducing global trade 
and production distorting domesti c support entitlements which reflects the global need to develop 
sustainable food systems as mandated in the SDGs. Whether it is said explicitly or not, realistically, 
reducing those entitlements by at least half by 2030 is the minimum that will be require d to deliver 
on that SDG objective.  
 
New Zealand also continues to work with other delegations to achieve outcomes through open, 
transparent and inclusive negotiations that aim to build a pathway to multilateralism over time. We 
look forward to an outcome  on Services Domestic Regulation and continue to build support for our 
Joint Ministerial Statement on Fossil Fuel Subsidy Reform at MC12. We invite, and encourage, others 
to join us. Finally, I cannot conclude without reference to the Dispute Settlement Me chanism. We 
must try to achieve a framework at MC12, with timeframes and objectives, to work through the 
Appellate Body impasse and resolve this most pressing institutional concern – and I listened carefully 
to the ideas set out by Ambassador Machado in th is respect.  
 
19. China  
 
Thank you, Madam Chair for convening this meeting and also for your impressive remarks this 
morning. Thanks also go to the negotiating chairs for the reports. Colleagues, forty two working 
days is what we only have before MC12. Of c ourse, if there is some work scheduled for the weekend, 
China 's constructive engagement can always be expected. However, we can 't expect miracles to 
happen within such a short period of time. Pragmatism and realism is what we need in the weeks 
ahead. Equal ly, being reasonable and flexible is vital as well. We should focus on those which have 
the possibility to achieve consensus.  
 
Members should restrain from introducing new things, controversial topics, and those that are even 
beyond the function of our Or ganization or negotiating mandate, into our current discussions. Those 
who try to do so will destroy the negotiating momentum and lead the MC12 nowhere. After four 2 
years, and given the double blow of COVID -19 pandemic and WTO 's existential crisis, 164 Members 
have to show solidarity to the world, instead of division. In terms of the outcome document, we 
support GC Chair 's current consultations towards a consensual Ministerial Declaration. In our view, 
reaffirmation of the commitment to the multilateral tr ading system, support to WTO 's core values 
and basic principles, opposition to unilateralism and protectionism, and smooth operation of global 
supply chains and value chains, should be some indispensable elements.  
 
On response to the pandemic we support t o have political commitments on WTO 's response to 
COVID -19, and achieve specific decisions in certain areas including TRIPS waiver at least on 
vaccines. Moreover, the pandemic has triggered a humanitarian and socio -economic crisis, and 
developing countries  have been disproportionately impacted. It is therefore imperative to achieve a 
PSH solution to address the food security and livelihood crisis in developing countries, not to mention 
it is a standalone mandated issue. On fisheries subsidies, China support s a fair and balanced outcome 
for the final disciplines and will engage constructively 3 in the final stage of discussion. Madam Chair, 
dear colleagues, restoring Appellate Body and bringing the dispute settlement system back to normal 
operation is clearly  the top -most priority for most Members. While being realistic about the prospect 
at MC12, we firmly believe that it is of critical importance to this organization at least having a work 
plan on the AB issue, ideally the reaffirmation of Members ' support to the two -tier system and 
establishment of a roadmap for AB 's restoration.  
 
20. Philippines  
 
I wish to thank the Director General, Dr. Ngozi, and the Chairs of the negotiating groups for their 
briefings albeit sobering. Mme DG, please allow me to share some of my delegation 's thoughts on 
our work towards MC12  
 
Our delegation appreciates the DG 's leadership in highlighting for MC12 and beyond the important 
role and vital contributions of the WTO towards the global mandate of achieving sustainabl e and 
inclusive development that protects the environment and addresses the climate crisis as well.  
 
On fisheries subsidies, we were encouraged by the political impetus that the 15 July Ministerial 
provided us, but it is apparent now that there is a dire need for even more intensive work, real 
diplomatic flexibility and mutual trust in navigating through our line -by-line negotiations. Otherwise, WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 164 - 
 
  there will not be much to deliver at MC12. The only silver lining I can see is the DG 's wise advice 
that the dar kest moment of a tunnel comes before the light re -appears, so at the moment we have 
no choice but to persevere and move forward.  
 
On agriculture, here too, negotiations have spanned too many years. The Philippines would like to 
underscore that we must del iver on the substantial and proportionate reduction of trade and 
production -distorting domestic support taking into full account the development needs of developing 
Members, and on obtaining some tangible results in public stockholding and the special safe guard 
mechanism.  
 
On the WTO 's response to the Covid pandemic, the Philippines remains supportive of all tools that 
facilitate the increased production and movement of essential medical goods. The TRIPS Chairs text -
based process on the waiver and Ambassad or Walker 's role as facilitator are deeply appreciated. We 
need to cooperate with them and let them take leadership and guide us to deliver by MC12.  
 
While we are all cognizant of the need for reform in all three pillars of the multilateral trading system , 
the Philippines would emphasize that for the WTO to remain credible as an institution, we require a 
functioning two -tier dispute settlement system.  
 
Finally, we commend the bright spots provided by the continuous progress made in the various Joint 
State ment Initiatives. We believe these initiatives positively contribute to the multilateral trading to 
be able to respond to the policy exigencies of the modern -day global trade.  
 
21. Indonesia  
 
Thank you, Madam DG for convening this meeting and for your rep ort and assessment. I am 
delivering this statement on behalf of my HOD, Ambassador Grata, who unfortunately cannot attend 
this important meeting due to her engagement in chairing a meeting at the WHO. Indonesia 
appreciates the Chairs of the Negotiating Gro ups and take note of their respective reports.  
 
WTO Response to the Pandemic  
 
Indonesia would like to remind all Members that the Covid -19 Pandemic is far from over. We can 
only stop this deadly pandemic if we do it simultaneously in every corner of the world. In the last 
few weeks, we are seeing a resurgence in the number of infections and mortality, as new variants 
are identified as more transmissible.  
 
We cannot do that if the access to live saving vaccines and medicines are limited only to a few 
countries. The WTO could help to ensure that trade rules would not hinder global collaboration to 
fulfil the access. At this point of time, we need to do everything in our control to help stop this 
pandemic. It is high time for this Organization to prioritize in saving human lives and livelihoods, 
above all priorities. For us, having an MC12 outcome that does not address such a need would be 
very difficult to accept. Furthermore, it is also our opportunity to show the credibility of the WTO to 
help addressing t his global crisis.  
 
In that regard, Madam DG and all Members, Indonesia is of the view that a conclusion of the MC -12 
must also include an outcome on the TRIPS Waiver, which had already been supported of 64 
Members, to be an integral part of the WTO respo nse to the pandemic, to ensure this organization 
contribute to equal access of medical products and technology in addressing COVID -19.  
 
Mandated Issues  
 
While on the Mandated Issues, Madam Chair, Indonesia 's priority is to finalise the agriculture 
negotiation on permanent solution for PSH and operable SSM. These two subjects are more relevant 
now than ever, as the pandemic also expose vulnerabilities of trade driven food security.  
 
The implications of COVID -19 pandemic, particularly on food and livelihood security in developing 
countries and LDCs has also been underlined by G33 Ministers in the G33 Informal Ministerial 
Meeting on 16 September 2021.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 165 - 
 
  As Madam Chair has rightfully mentioned this morning, the G 33 Ministers have also underscored 
their commitment in moving forward the agriculture negotiations in WTO on all mandated issues and 
the expeditious resolution of permanent solution on PSH, and SSM.  
 
To this end, Madam Chair, Indonesia urges for a balance d COASS Chair 's text in reflecting the 
concerns and views from all Members as well as submissions, and proposals by Members that have 
been submitted post Buenos Aires and in these recent years.  
 
Also on the mandated issues Madam Chair, Indonesia also plac es great importance on the finalization 
of the Fisheries Subsidies negotiations. As fisheries sector in Indonesia is predominantly of a small -
scale and operate within our national jurisdiction, we would like to achieve a discipline that fairly 
address the culprit and protect the livelihood of small scale, vulnerable fishers.  
 
Studies show that artisanal and small -scale fisheries enjoy only 19% of global fisheries subsidies. 
Compare to the large scale and distance water fishing vessels that enjoy 81% global  subsidies, 
artisanal and small scale should not be treated in an equal basis like those who enjoy subsidy the 
most.  
 
In this regard, we would like to stress again that to have a fair discipline on FS we need to ensure 
the principle of common but differen tiate responsibility is respected. Hence, we believe that any SDT 
prescription must not be limited to time bound flexibilities.  
 
While on the current negotiation, we are considering very positively the new proposals made by 
India dan the ACP/AG Groups dur ing last week negotiations, which in terms of policy, we are in 
support to the principles of common but differentiated responsibility and polluters pay principles 
advocated by both proposals. 1) We understand that the Indian and the ACP/AG proposals were 
made at a very late stage of our negotiations, however, we believe that we should all be open for 
suggestions from all Members, especially if there is still no consensus on the fisheries management 
concept yet. 2) And we would like to note that the ACP/AG p roposal represents almost half of the 
WTO Membership, hence we believe it should not be disregarded.  
 
In this regard, we would like also to stress again the importance of the SNDT discipline in the fisheries 
subsidies negotiations, as reflected by the sta tements of 81 Ministers during the 15 July TNC which 
considers the text as still being imbalance in terms of SNDT, while SNDT is an integral part of our 
negotiating mandate.  
 
Indonesia will continue to engage constructively and contribute at its best in m oving forward a 
landing zone for outcomes in agriculture and fisheries subsidies for MC12.  
 
Other Issues  
 
While on other proposed third MC12 outcomes: a. On e -commerce, for Indonesia, an outcome on 
the e-commerce moratorium at MC12 will depend on our abi lity to clarify the scope and definition of 
Electronic Transmission. b. While on SNDT, we support the G90 proposal, since Indonesia strongly 
believes that SDT is a treaty -embedded right, and the Doha mandate emphasizes about making SDT 
provisions precise, effective, and operational.  
 
And lastly, on the Appellate Body issue, we consider a top priority to restore the Appellate Body 
functions, which is at the core of the two -stage dispute settlement system. Indonesia would once 
again call on Members renew thei r political will to resolve this issue.  
 
22. United Kingdom  
 
We meet today in this private session alongside the WTO 's much more public face, in the shape of 
the Public Forum. This was my first Forum, and I have to say I was really impressed with the 
enthusiasm, the expertise and the energy that I encountered.  
 
Whatever the topic – from green trade, to digitalisation and development, MSMEs, gender, 
telecommunications, and many more – it's clear to me that business and civil society remain 
genuinely invested in having the WTO at the heart of rebuilding the global economy after this 
pandemic. And that we have much to learn from business as we do that.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 166 - 
 
  And those business voices are also important because they remind us all of who we are sent here to 
serve, and of what matters to those stakeholders outside the walls of this building. So I don 't think 
we need to apologise to ourselves for holding these meetings simultaneously, even if it has increased 
our stress levels a little bit over the past  couple of days.  
 
Madam Chair, those business voices have a clear expectation - and hope - that we will deliver 
multilateral outcomes at MC12: both in terms of the hard detail of the policy, as well restoring 
broader credibility of this organisation.  
 
For our own part, I have been clear that, as the UK, we are prioritising multilateral outcomes on 
fisheries subsidies - and let me join the tributes to Ambassador Wills on that – and on our collective 
response to the pandemic, and we recognise the importance o f finding a path forward on agriculture. 
Let me pay tribute there to the work of Ambassador Peralta and Ambassador Walker.  
 
Most of those businesses I spoke to this week are also eager to see progress on the various member -
led initiatives that we have on t he table right now.  
 
Look at the major milestone we have just reached in the Joint Initiative on Services Domestic 
Regulation, effectively closing that text. That was delivered not just through determination and 
perseverance and compromise, but with the co nsistent support and encouragement of global 
business. And it 's an outcome will make a real, measurable difference to global trade as we build 
back better.  
 
And likewise the good news from the MSME group – and congratulations to Ambassador Cancela - 
who fo llowed up on their package in December 2020 through further demonstrating the political will 
around a draft text for MC12.  
 
We are also really pleased with the momentum behind the e -commerce discussions.  
So strong support for a successful, substantive MC12  was a message I heard loud and clear this 
week from our business stakeholders.  
 
But equally loud and clear was the sense that this Ministerial Conference is an opportunity to start 
a process of building back better and making this organisation fit for the  challenges for the third 
decade of the 21st century.  
 
That means, for us, that we need to have a clear message about the path forward on WTO reform, 
which makes space for progress on the different elements that matter to different delegations in this 
organisation – whether that be dispute settlement, transparency and monitoring, and the negotiating 
function, including the role of Special and Differential Treatment.  
 
But we also need a path forward, beyond MC12, on issues that matter to our societies and bu sinesses 
today – whether that be health, the climate crisis and the environment, gender equality, and market -
distorting practices, including industrial subsidies.  
 
So, my colleagues are of course quite right to say that we have to stay focussed on a limite d number 
of substantive deliverables for this conference. But we do believe – here in my delegation – that we 
can be slightly less restrained in framing MC12 as a launch pad for future deliverables. That means 
locking in progress on issues at the heart of creating a greener, more sustainable, more equitable 
global economy post -pandemic, and challenging ourselves when we come back in January – after 
our Christmas festivities - to take that forward with renewed momentum.  
 
Madam Chair, it also comes down to re maining relevant, and keeping up with the real world outside 
these walls. And that means we should rightly be kept on our toes by global business and civil 
society, and we should be rising to the challenge they set us.  
 
Showing those pathways forward… showing that the WTO can work flexibly, and nimbly, in different 
configurations, on issues that matter to society at large, is part of the important foundation that we 
can build at MC12 for the future success of this organisation.  
 
And Madam Chair , as the clock ticks down - and we 've been reminded how little time we have left 
and how we are we still absent on an agreement on many of these important issues - I call for 
inspiration from the other big event of today…this year 's most hotly anticipated cinematic WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 167 - 
 
  moment…courtesy of perhaps the UK 's greatest export, who goes by the name of Bond, James 
Bond… And say that, for the WTO this is certainly No Time to Die. Indeed, it is time for us to give 
fresh life to the WTO, not just in words, but in deeds.  
 
23. Costa Rica (Joint Initiative on Services Domestic Regulation)  
 
Good morning/afternoon. I welcome the opportunity to inform you about recent developments in 
the context of the open -ended negotiations in the Joint Initiative on Services Domestic Regulati on. 
 
Since my last report, the Initiative held a very successful first meeting after the summer break just 
this Monday 27  September. Singapore announced its decision to join the Initiative. This brings the 
total number of participating Members to 65. With the participation of Singapore as one of the larger 
services traders, the Initiative now covers more than 90% of world services trade. While this 
represents true global reach, the group is nevertheless firmly committed to use the remaining time 
before MC12  to convince even more Members of the benefits of joining this Initiative.  
 
But the good news I have to report, Madam Chair, do not end here: at the meeting, thanks to the 
flexibility and pragmatism shown by all participating Members, the group was able to  resolve the 
remaining outstanding issues in the negotiating text. Following the meeting, I circulated under my 
responsibility a clean version of the Reference Paper on Services Domestic Regulation, which is now 
an unrestricted document. A Public Forum ses sion on services domestic regulation held just 
yesterday highlighted how important it is for business that the text is now available to all: it does 
not only signal that the Initiative is on the right track towards delivering an outcome in time for 
MC12, b ut it also shows that we remain responsive and open to business needs and interests.  
 
As agreed by participating Members, the clean version of the Reference Paper contains: a provision 
requiring non -discrimination between men and women in the context of a uthorization procedures 
for service suppliers. This will be the very first time that a WTO outcome contains such a provision; 
an optional alternative set of disciplines on financial services for Members; and a ceiling transitional 
period of 7 years for dev eloping country Members that need to delay implementation of specific 
disciplines for specific sectors.  
 
Based on a clean version of the Reference Paper, participants are now working towards the 
submission of pre -finalization schedules incorporating the SD R disciplines by the end of October. 
This step will represent another key milestone in this process. I will also use the coming weeks to 
consult with delegations on a Ministerial outcome document that – we firmly hope – will mark the 
end of these negotiati ons. 
 
Madam Chair, I have made this clear at each of my reports, but I cannot emphasize this enough: 
the high level of commitment of Members is testament to the importance of this negotiating issue. 
Enhancing transparency and predictability of regulatory f rameworks to boost the potential of services 
trade is crucial, and even more now as a building block in the post -COVID economic recovery.  
 
Communications by business associations have been issued regularly throughout the past year and 
outline the clear ex pectation of hundreds of services businesses around the world that WTO Members 
deliver a long due outcome on services domestic regulation by MC12.  
 
The Initiative has a real opportunity to achieve a result that will have a concrete impact on the 
operation s of services suppliers and will contribute to reinvigorate stakeholders' confidence in the 
negotiating function of this Organization. We will not squander this opportunity.  
 
To conclude, in keeping with the open, transparent, and inclusive nature of this  process, the Initiative 
is ready to engage with all interested Members, to address any questions, needs, and concerns. I 
invite all Members not already part of this process to engage actively in the discussions and consider 
joining the Joint Initiative on  Services Domestic Regulation.  
 
24. Costa Rica  
 
Madame Chair, allow me to briefly switch to Spanish. With only a few weeks to go before MC12, we 
are at a time when we need to take action and achieve agreements. The positions of Costa Rica are 
known and are reflected in our previous statements.  In view of time, we will not repeat them. We 
will present our observations on ongoing negotiations and on the ongoing processes towards MC12.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 168 - 
 
  We invite all Members to participate constructively and focused on finding solutions. Costa Rica will 
remain committed to this vision.  
 
25. Russian Federation  
 
Thank you, Director -General, for convening this meeting and for your assessment of the current 
situation as the Chair of the TNC.  
 
In his address to the 76th Session of the UN General Assembly, the UN Secretary -General told, "we 
are on the edge of an abyss and moving  in the wrong direction. We face the greatest cascade of 
crises in our lifetimes. Solidarity is missing in action – just when we need it most. " 
 
This is a striking warning for all of us who must engage constructively in the ongoing negotiations 
and in the preparations of MC12 outcomes. As the WTO is the only place, where MTS issues can be 
negotiated, we have to do our utmost in order to prepare a global response to the current challenges 
by tangible, realistic and meaningful outcomes at the Conference and b eyond.  
 
Regrettably, in two months before the MC12, we observe the absence of consensus on the majority 
of issues, notably including  fisheries subsidies, COVID -19 response, agriculture, WTO reform and 
restauration of the DSB.  
 
We urge Members to develop cl ear, targeted and implementable disciplines rather than promoting 
far-reaching and ambiguous prohibitions which necessitate whole box of examples. Let me reiterate 
that all WTO Members should eventually implement all substantial disciplines with possible m inor 
exclusions. Let me also call upon Members to restrain from using these multilateral negotiations as 
a means to solve political issues, especially if those issues do not belong to the WTO competence. 
We have to embrace multilateral mindset and work tog ether in a consensus -seeking spirit to 
successfully conclude these negotiations at MC12.  
 
We support discussions at the WTO on measures in the field of intellectual property to counter 
COVID -19. We are confident that certain flexibilities, in particular in  the IPR, are appropriate for the 
period of emergency.  
 
In order to ensure the smooth adoption of the document on «trade and health», the decisions of the 
Conference should not inflate the scope of member 's commitments under WTO agreements, nor 
expand the mandate and the budget of WTO.  
 
Against a backdrop of persistent differences in positions on agriculture issues, we stand for a 
pragmatic and realistic approach. In our view, the achievable outcome of the MC12 would be a 
thought -out Roadmap (or Program) for further negotiations on trade distorting domestic support. In 
addition, an MC12 outcome on Enhancing Transparency in agriculture is also needed. Russia would 
like to note its support to the efforts of Members in improving transparency in agric ulture.  
 
We are ready to support a consensus -based decision on elimination of export prohibitions and 
restrictions on food products purchased for non -commercial humanitarian purposes by the World 
Food Programme. Russia finds this issue to be the one of mos t doable decisions for MC12.  
 
It is crucial to use the upcoming MC12 as a unique chance to set a clear path for modernization of 
the Organization. We support the adoption of a political MC12 declaration which, in our view, should 
reflect the issue of the W TO reform, including the establishment of a dedicated Working Group. This 
group could be vested with the authority to discuss in an open, inclusive and transparent manner 
issues of relevance to the WTO reform with a focus on improvement of the negotiating,  monitoring 
and dispute settlement functions of the WTO.  
 
We expect the MC12 outcomes that would facilitate urge launching of substantive discussions on 
WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism with a view to reach ultimate solution. This is one of the key 
priorit ies for Russia. Our supreme objective is to find a way to restore the full operation of the DSB. 
Specific roadmap should be agreed upon at the upcoming Conference.  
 
Now it 's the time to restore the performance and improve relevance of the WTO to the changi ng 
world. Is the time to deliver.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 169 - 
 
  26. Chad (LDCs)  
 
I am speaking on behalf of the LDC Group. We commend your efforts to make the WTO truly 
operational and to increase its relevance. The LDC Group also thanks you for your key participation 
in the South -South dialogue on LDCs and development held in Montreux.  I echo your metaphor 
about negotiation; it is indeed an art. But it is also about cooperation. No one can negotiate alone, 
making proposals and putting forward their own counter -proposals.  
 
We must have partners who take their share of the responsibility. We are not complacent about the 
status quo. I refer to our group's proposals on the specific development needs of LDCs, including 
post-graduation.  As you highlighted very well in your opening remark s at the Public Forum, 
international trade contributes to resilience in overcoming challenges such as the current COVID -19 
crisis. However, there is also a need to find a formula and framework to strengthen the WTO in order 
to better respond to future cris es such as promoting transparency on export restrictions.  
 
There is also a need to explore ways in which to help LDCs acquire the necessary technologies to 
adapt and innovate in order to reduce their dependence on a limited number of suppliers.  There is 
still a long way to go to reduce many of the divisions and trade weight imbalances between LDCs 
and the rest of the world.  We remain confident that your leadership will enable LDCs to lay a good 
foundation at the Twelfth  Ministerial Conference so as to move forward in our work with a view to 
better using trade to develop our economies.  
 
LDCs believe that a successful MC12 should enable us to achieve both tangible and meaningful 
development outcomes, especially for the most vulnerable Members, and clear instru ctions or work 
programmes for a better way forward.  Furthermore, the LDC Group remains committed to 
implementing the Bali and Nairobi Decisions in favour of LDCs. The outcome of the MC12 should 
enable us to implement these decisions.  In the meantime, the Group has already provided the bodies 
responsible for implementing the decisions with its assessments of what is needed in this regard.  It 
submitted a proposal to the Committee on Rules of Origin and provided its assessment of the 
operationalization of the waiver on LDC services, arising from the results of the workshop jointly 
organized this year with the Council for Trade in Services.  
 
The LDC Group hopes that the outcome of MC12 will positively reflect its Draft Ministerial Decision 
so that all support me asures for LDCs at the WTO are extended to graduated LDCs.  We plan to hold 
a virtual meeting of LDC ministers in mid -October to adopt the LDC Ministerial  Declaration.  
 
Regarding access to vaccines , LDCs believe that the outcome of MC12 should facilitate widespread, 
fast, effective and affordable access to vaccines against COVID -19. For this to happen, a waiver 
from some of the provisions of the TRIPS Agreement will be necessary to enable all WTO  Members 
to fight again st this pandemic and build their economic resilience to future shocks and pandemics.  
 
With regard to the negotiations on fisheries subsidies, we reiterate that LDCs are not responsible for 
the problem of overfishing and depletion of marine resources.  The L DC Group therefore believes that 
an agreement on fisheries subsidies must be fair and equitable in order to achieve an outcome at 
MC12.  
 
Agriculture, including cotton, is a vital sector for all LDCs, if not for the majority of WTO  Members. 
Thank you, Madam  Chair, for reminding us of World Cotton Day on 7  October.  The LDC group 
considers that the outcome of a successful MC12 should send a clear and positive signal for 
comprehensive agricultural sector reform.  Such reform must prioritize food security issues that are 
critical to promoting agricultural trade resilience and those for which ministerial mandates exist, 
such as trade -distorting domestic support, cotton, the special safeguard mechanism and the public 
stockholding for food security purposes.  The LDC Group is hoping for at least a post -MC12 work 
programme through which clear instructions will be given to guide Members towards MC13.  
 
Special and differential treatment is one of the pillars of the multilateral trading system. It should 
be preserved and s trengthened for LDCs and developing countries.  
 
Electronic commerce has been a recurring theme, and even more so during the COVID -19 pandemic. 
This sector in particular has shown its dynamism and resilience during this period. All Members would 
like to rea p the dividends of such a sector.  It is imperative that the MC12 leads to the achievement 
of positive and fair outcomes in this area so that no one is left behind.  For example, LDCs remain WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 170 - 
 
  committed to the 1998 Work Programme and have a strong interest in resolving issues relating to 
customs duties on electronic transmissions.  We have a submission on the table dealing with the 
digital divide.  
 
However, we are also interested in what is needed at the WTO level with respect to how we can 
make better use of di gital platforms, online payment systems and access to international banking 
systems, build our capacities, improve technology, and establish rules that take into account the 
development needs of LDCs.  
 
With regard to non -violation complaints, LDCs urge Mem bers to agree on a permanent moratorium 
at MC12 on the application of Article XXIII:1(b) and 1(c) of the GATT  1994 on non -violation and 
situation complaints under the TRIPS Agreement.  
 
Madam Chair, we cannot talk about revitalizing the WTO without also tou ching on the issue of reform, 
which, it must be remembered, is an ongoing process in order to adapt and respond to the challenges 
of each era.  Moreover, the WTO has for several years now been facing challenges in trying to deliver 
tangible results. The App ellate Body, which is the main pillar of the Organization, is currently not in 
operation.  In this respect, we support the establishment of a working group on WTO reform and are 
in favour of a post -MC12 work programme.  These issues must be addressed in the outcomes of the 
MC12 so that a reform package can maintain the fundamental principles and purpose of the WTO as 
a rules -based, Member -led organization based on decision -making by consensus.  
 
Transparency and non -discrimination are also pillars of the WTO s ystem.  
 
Our Group wishes you every success in your preparations for the MC12 and you can also count on 
our support.  
 
27. India  
 
Let me begin by expressing thanks to the DG and the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their 
respective reports.  
 
Chair, we have an important task today, to agree on the key deliverables for MC12. We have already 
missed two deadlines – of July and September. This disadvantages the developing countries and 
LDC's, who will be coerced on issues brought on the table at the last min ute.  
 
Taking into consideration the circumstances under which MC12 is being held, we need to focus on 
issues that matter for the world at this hour of crisis. In this context, let me lay out the priorities for 
MC12, which are by and large, the priorities of the developing world.  
 
Food Security  
 
First, millions have regressed deeper into poverty during this pandemic and their food security is a 
critical issue for this organization. A simple, efficient, and permanent solution on extending PSH for 
food security purposes to new programs and new products should be definitive deliverable for MC12. 
In this regard, the recent proposals made by the Africa Group and the G33 offers a concrete solution 
to deliver a credible outcome at MC12.  Approval of this will show that WTO delivers on past Ministerial 
decisions also.   
 
WTO's Response to the Pandemic  
 
Chair, agreement on the WTO 's response to the pandemic will be determined by reaching an outcome 
on the TRIPS waiver proposal.  A recent study states that the total cost of delayed vaccinations – in 
terms of lost income – will amount to $2.3 trillion, with the developing world shouldering most of 
that bill. Any response to pandemic will lack credibility if the response to IP related challenges is not 
built in. H aving said that, Chair I would caution against discussions that are skewed, overtly focused 
on goods trade, aim at reducing the available policy space for Members, impose onerous obligations 
in the name of transparency. These discussions promote the intere sts and benefits of a few while 
compounding the challenges for many developing and least developed countries especially amid a 
pandemic.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 171 - 
 
  Export restrictions are legitimate policy tool available with Members and its current use in the context 
of a pandemic  is symptomatic and causal, reflecting acute supply side constraints, and unless the 
supply of essential products to combat pandemics is augmented by mobilizing the global 
manufacturing capacity, by making the IP know -how and technology openly accessible t o all 
potential manufacturers, we will not be able to address these challenges. In this regard, we also 
need be cognizant that rules and agreements inked for a normal situation, not foreseeing 
extraordinary circumstances like the pandemic, will not deliver  the desired and effective outcomes. 
Moreover, WTO response should not only try to address the existing trade barriers like export 
restrictions, but also address new and emerging ones, like vaccine differentiations or COVID 
passports affecting personnel mo vements in turn resulting in trade barriers for export of services. 
Additionally, free flow of services and supplies, like health services, international telemedicine 
services needed for handling the pandemic or natural disasters must be prioritized. Chair  we have 
shared elements that in our understanding must be a part of any credible, effective, comprehensive 
and practical response to the pandemic, and we urge that these get incorporated in the various 
discussions that are currently being held on this iss ue, including the facilitator process.  
 
Fisheries Subsidies  
 
Chair, at the Ministerial TNC on 15 July our Minister had highlighted the concern of developing 
countries and LDCs regarding the imbalance in the draft text and suggested the way out to bring 
balance by incorporating the principle of "Polluter Pays " and "Common but differentiated 
responsibility " in formulating the disciplines.  
 
Chair, it is well established that the current unsustainable state of fisheries exists because of those 
Members who have historically heavily subsidized  their fisheries sector, developed huge industrial 
fishing fleet capacities and exploited the marine res ources in an unrestrained manner. Without 
tackling these harmful subsidies, it is not possible to have sustainable fishing which will take care of 
our future generations.  
 
In order to remove present imbalances in the Chair 's text, India has submitted a com prehensive 
proposal in the document RD/TN/RL/147 on Article 5 of the draft text keeping in view the demands 
of developing countries and LDCs on S&DT and to incorporate the principle of "Common but 
differentiated responsibilities " for future policy space an d in the form of carve -outs for subsistence, 
artisanal and small -scale fishermen up to coastal Members EEZ (200 nautical miles).  
 
Let us refrain from judging proposals and giving comments like taking forward or backward steps, 
and engage in constructive negotiation.  
 
Special & Differential Treatment  
 
We believe that the revised G90 proposal provides the much -needed groundwork to adv ance and 
finalize  the ongoing discussions on this critical area. There is nothing to refute the fact that it is 
especially the developing countries and LDCs that have been the worst hit by this pandemic, the 
objectives of development that the proposal envi sages to achieve and the challenges thereof which 
it aims to overcome are, relevant today more than ever. This is a decades long pending mandated 
issue on which we are yet to deliver. Thus, I urge Members to engage constructively on this issue 
and work tog ether to deliver a meaningful outcome at MC12.  
  
E-Commerce Moratorium, Appellate Body  
 
We request the demandeurs of moratorium to submit a proposal explaining the rationale and the 
benefits so that we can appraise our Ministers for a decision at MC12.  We also seek immediate 
restoration of the Appellate Body.  
 
Finally, Chair, we are working closely with the GC Chair on the MC12 outcome document. I wish to 
mention here that it is important to ensure the final outcome document must only reflect the interest 
of the Members on mandated issues.   
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 172 - 
 
  28. Uruguay (Informal Working Group on MSMEs)  
 
I will make a statement on behalf of Ambassador Cancela in his capacity as Coordinator of the 
Informal Working Group on MSMEs and afterwards I will switch to Spanish for a  brief statement on 
national capacity  
 
I am pleased to announce that last Friday, 24 of September, the MSMEs Group finalized a draft 
ministerial declaration for MC12. The draft declaration states the Group's commitment to address 
challenges facing MSMEs se eking to trade internationally, it recognizes the negative impact of 
COVID -19 on small business and the need for a global coordinated response to help MSMEs recover 
from the pandemic. It also takes stock of the Group's work since it was established, includ ing the 
adoption of the package of  six recommendations and declarations  in December  2020.  In this regard 
I would like to thank Members of the Group for their flexibility and co nstructive spirit, and invite 
WTO Members that are not participating in the Group to endorse our Ministerial Declaration.  
 
Besides the MSME ministerial declaration, a concrete MC12 deliverable will be the launch of the 
Trade4MSMEs platform. The platform lo oks to support MSMEs and policymakers by bringing reliable 
trade -related information together in one place.  
 
The MSME Group also launched a Digital Champions for Small Businesses Initiative on MSME Day in 
June with the partnership of the International Cha mber of Commerce and the International Trade 
Centre . The initiative aims to support small businesses ' participation in international trade by helping 
them to go digital. More than 100 proposals were received and the winners will be announced at 
MC12.  
 
Of course, implementation of our December 2020 package is a clear priority of the Group . Actions 
are also being taken to this end. In addition, the Group have started looking into new issues. Good 
discussions have taken place since the beginning of the year on  various topics including innovation 
policies and how they can help MSMEs grow and trade, rural MSMEs, trade digitalization, MSME 
cyberreadiness, and low value shipments.  
 
As Ambassador Cancela always says, the MSME Group is both a think tank and a "do tank". As I 
mentioned before the objective of the Group is to improve the participation of MSMEs in international 
trade through recommendations and soft law, but also through concrete deliverables and tangible 
solutions. The Trade4MSMEs and the Digital Champion for Small Business initiative are practical and 
tangible ways to help MSMEs trade. These initiatives reflect the spirit in which we work: a spirit of 
pragmatism and a solutions -oriented mode . 
 
Finally, I would like to invite WTO Members that are not part of our Group to join us in our endeavours 
to help MSMEs. The MSME initiative is about inclusiveness. It is about people. It is about helping 
those who make the heart of our economies beat. In these difficult times where small busin esses 
around the world have been hit very severely by lockdowns and supply chain disruptions, it is 
important that we do our utmost to help our MSMEs. I therefore invite you all to endorse our 
ministerial declaration.  
 
29. Argentina  
 
Thank you, Madam Dire ctor-General, and thank you also to the chairpersons of the various bodies 
for their reports and efforts.  
 
With exactly two months to go before our ministers meet in Geneva, we need to be responsible, 
realistic and pragmatic about the outcomes we can, and should, achieve at the next 
Ministerial  Conference.  However, we understand that pragmatism should not be an excuse to impose 
agreements that in reality have no impact or, even worse, that legitimize and enshrine what does 
not work or what we are doing wron g. Nor should being realistic be a pretext for us to stop engaging 
in long -overdue discussions and avoid generating solutions on pending issues.  On the contrary, 
MC12 must serve to re -position the Organization as a central tool for economic development and , in 
the current context, for recovery from the ravages of a pandemic that continues to affect many 
countries.  
 
Against that backdrop, I would like to touch on four issues: fisheries subsidies negotiations, 
agriculture, the WTO's response to the pandemic, and dispute settlement.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 173 - 
 
   
On fisheries subsidies, we have high expectations following the pace shown by the Chair in the 
text-based negotiations. We particularly appreciate his efforts.  Argentina, like many other Members, 
looks constructively at each propos al submitted on the basis of a single criterion: how much it 
contributes to the objective of reaching an ambitious agreement. Short -term solutions or those that 
somehow leave open the possibility of circumventing prohibitions or removing subsidies lead 
nowhere and are completely counterproductive.  In that spirit and based on those premises, 
Argentina, as a coastal country with an extensive maritime coastline, has participated actively – and 
will continue to do so – in the negotiations  
 
In agriculture, we ap preciate the efforts being made by Ambassador Abraham Peralta.  We continue 
to emphasize that moving forward with a domestic support reduction programme involving all 
aspects of Article 6 of the Agreement on Agriculture, in accordance with the principle of 
proportionality, is a priority. We consider that the framework for negotiations presented in 
January  2020 in document JOB/AG/177 provides a sound basis for entering into the negotiations.  
 
We also consider it essential to make progress on market access, an  area in which we have also 
been constructive, through the proposal contained in document JOB/AG/198. We could work on tariff 
simplification, strengthening transparency and removing the special agricultural safeguard. We could 
also consider moving forward with a work programme under this pillar for MC13.  
 
We would like to negotiate in good faith with all Members on concrete proposals under each of the 
pillars with the aim of advancing an ambitious, realistic and balanced negotiating package for the 
next Min isterial Conference. Together with other Members who share similar positions, we have 
initiated a series of contacts to listen to the entire Membership, to find out what their main concerns 
and objectives really are and, on that basis, to bring positions c loser together. Agriculture cannot 
continue to be an issue that is endlessly postponed in the WTO.  
 
We are concerned, however, that a dynamic is being created whereby possible progress in one area 
is made conditional on what is achieved in another, without  discussing the proposals on their own 
merit. This will make it very difficult to achieve substantive outcomes.  
 
Regarding the WTO's response to the pandemic, there are high expectations about what we can 
achieve collectively in the next two months and bey ond the Ministerial Conference.  We believe that 
the WTO and its existing system of rules can make a significant contribution to bringing us closer to 
the ambitious goal of scaling up production and ensuring equitable access to vaccines and treatments 
to end the pandemic and create a framework to deal more efficiently with future crises of this nature.  
If the aim is to adopt a declaration or decision on this issue, open text -based discussions should 
begin as soon as possible.  
 
Finally, regarding the dispute settlement system, Argentina, as a developing country and a frequent 
user thereof, believes that a rules -based system is the best alternative to facilitate economic growth, 
confidence building, predictability and stability in our trade links. Such a system  exists and is the 
fruit of our decades -long multilateral experience.  We are aware of the systemic concerns of some 
Members, but we also believe that there needs to be sufficient flexibility on this matter to be able to 
build a collective way forward and t hat MC12 should send a clear signal in that direction.  
 
30. Mongolia  
 
Thank you, Director General Chair, for convening this meeting and candid sharing of your views. I 
also would like to express my appreciation to chairs of negotiating committees for their tremendous 
work.  
 
On agriculture, Mongolia, as a G33 Member, is of the view that the PSH and SSM remain important 
issues for developing countries. Mongolia remains ready to engage with Members with a view to 
resolving the issue and arriving at consensus.  
 
On the negotiatio ns on fisheries,  Mongolia as landlocked country remains ready to support any 
consensus and urge delegations to demonstrate maximum flexibility and conclude the negotiations 
before the MC12.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 174 - 
 
  Mongolia wishes to note that the SDT is an important issue to whi ch the Members have to pay a 
particular attention.  
 
On vaccines and waivers, the g lobal solidarity is required to ramp up and diversify global production 
of vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics to effectively deal with the spread of the COVID -19 virus. 
The WTO needs to act urgently to suppress the rising human toll and economic strain from the 
COVID -19 pandemic.  
 
The WTO reform should be addressed as the utmost priority. Essentially, the Members are 
encouraged to engage in constructive and meaningful dis cussion on further steps to restore a fully 
functioning Appellate body.  
 
Chair, I would like to underline the importance of the facilitating work of Ambassador Walker in WTO 
response to pandemic .  
 
As for MC12 is approaching, Mongolia would like to signal the following:  
 
The pandemic has brought and continues to bring about unprecedented disruptions to the global 
trade and supply chain. Recalling my statements made during the previous meetings on the WTO 
response to the COVID -19 pandemic, I would like to hi ghlight again that as restrictive border 
measures, SPS and other measures aimed at curbing the spread of the disease impacts the 
economies, efficient border crossing and effective trade facilitation are becoming more critical today.  
 
Contrary to  expectati ons, changes in consumption during the COVID -19 pandemic have led to 
increased import demand for manufactured consumer goods, a large part of which is moved in 
shipping containers , which effected on air cargo, rail, land and maritime transport . As a result , 
shipments and transport operations have been delayed and container freight rates significantly 
increased , which in turn, becoming the reason for the trade cost increase and disruption of the 
supply chain. This issue led not only to a shortage of the essential food and medical goods, but also 
led to a halt of supplies of necessary materials for certain industrial sectors  and even their shutdown . 
 
The WTO should address the other international organizations and, especially, air, railway, road and 
maritime l ogistic associations to report and propose solutions to resolve these issues today and to 
avoid them in the future.  
 
Madam Chair, in this regard, in the margins of the Public Forum, the Permanent Mission of Mongolia 
organized yesterday a session under the me "Facilitating transit and transport operation in crisis 
situation: Lessons learned from COVID -19". The panelists underlined the need of putting in place 
certain policies and procedures without disrupting global value and supply chains. In particularly, 
they recommended the adoption of the provisions laid down in the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement 
and simplifying customs procedures and concluded that its implementation could significantly benefit 
the countries to become more resilient to unforeseen glob al shocks like COVID -19 pandemic.  
 
Therefore, I would like to draw your attention as DG and TNC Chair and also attention of GC Chair 
to challenges caused by shortage of containers and enormous increase in trade cost and suggest 
convening a special session  or meeting within the WTO to discuss the ways to include these issues 
in the MC12 Outcome Document as well as to start consultations aimed at developing and creating 
an appropriate regulation mechanism for resolving the similar situations.  
 
31. Iceland (I nformal Working Group on Trade and Gender)  
 
I thank you Chair, as well as the chairs of the negotiating groups for the reports.  
 
Trade and gender  
 
First, as a co -Chair, I would like to give a brief report on the work of the informal working group on 
trade and gender. The Group includes WTO Members and Observers, the proponents of the Buenos 
Aires Declaration on Trade and Women 's Economic Empowerment. The group has been designed as 
an open and transparent body and does not intend to create a new set of  Agreements or rules. And 
I invite all of you that are not there to join the group.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 175 - 
 
  Between February and July 2021, Members have discussed various trade instruments, policies and 
programmes in support of women. This work is reflected in a draft MC12 outco me that was circulated 
on Monday along with the Retrospective Look of WTO Members and Observers Technical Work on 
Women's Economic Empowerment.  
 
The draft recommendations so far look at improving data collection on women and trade; integrating 
research res ults into trade policy instruments and programmes to support women 's economic 
empowerment; including integrating women 's economic empowerment issues into the regular work 
of relevant WTO committees and bodies; improving the impact of the Aid for Trade Init iative on 
women.  
 
The Draft MC12 Outcome and the Retrospective Look of technical work will be further discussed, in 
the IWG, in the next couple of weeks with the aim of producing a final document by the next regular 
meeting of the IWG on 18 October.  
 
32. Iceland  
 
Fisheries subsidises  
 
I want to emphasis on the importance of the negotiations and thank Ambassador Santiago Wills for 
his hard work and energetic leadership right from the start. WTO Agreements already recognize that 
Members ' policy choices to s ubsidise certain economic activities can have a trade distorting effect 
under certain circumstances. What is novel in these negotiations is that we are now asked to regulate 
not simply the trade distorting effects of such subsidies - but rather the harm th at they can cause 
to sustainability. It is of outmost important that the WTO concludes the negotiations before our next 
Ministerial meeting, as it was tasked to do by UN Sustainable development goals.  
 
Iceland firmly believes that fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing should 
be eliminated and is ready to continue engage constructively in the negotiations with the aim to 
successfully conclude an agreement before MC12.  
 
Agriculture  
 
Even though the Ministerial is fast approaching  and the time we have to work with is limited - we 
believe that an outcome can be reached at MC12 – laying a foundation and paving the way for future 
reform in this important pillar.  Iceland is ready to engage constructively and with a solutions -
oriented m indset for that to happen.  
 
We are long -time supporters of a decision to exempt humanitarian food purchases by the World 
Food Programme from any export prohibitions and restrictions. The COVID  crises and its effect on 
the food security of more vulnerable countries highlights the ever -pressing need of this issue.  We 
can also see an agreement form around a work program in agriculture that does not prejudge an 
outcome.  
 
And we do see transparency as an important issue where consensus can be reached. The COVID -19 
pandemic has highlighted the importance of a transparent multilateral trading system.  
 
Finally – I would like to emphasise the importance of any outcome to be balanced across pillars and 
taking into account concerns and sensitivities of all Members.  
 
33. Egypt  
 
Thank you, Madame Director General, for giving me the floor and for your sincere efforts to achieve 
concrete deliverables in MC12. We also thank the Chair of the GC and the Chairs of the WTO 
negotiating groups for their hard work and comprehensi ve reports.  
Egypt would like to associate itself with the statements delivered by Mauritius and Saudi Arabia on 
behalf of the African and Arab Groups, respectively.  
Madame Chair, in our view the realistic approach towards the outcomes of MC12 means that while 
we continue to do our best to achieve positive outcomes we should accept the fact that in some 
areas it may be difficult to reach consensus and we have to agree on a road map f or post MC12 work WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 176 - 
 
  that will ensure the WTO remains relevant and fit -for-purpose of the 21st century. We must also bear 
in mind the fact that the failure to reach positive outcomes in some negotiating files is the collective 
responsibility of the whole Membership and not the responsibility of the heads of the negotiating 
committees or the director general of the organization as the chair of the trade negotiations 
committee.  
Let me now share the issues that Egypt believes we should focus on in the run up to M C12 or in any 
post MC12 work programme:  
On the global health crisis, I would like to repeat some of the strong messages delivered by you 
Madame DG at the virtual White House Global COVID -19 Summit on 22 September: you stated I quote  
"sustainable economic a nd trade recovery can only be achieved with a policy that ensures rapid global 
access to vaccines. We have a choice, either we converge downwards by allowing the virus to drag us 
all back down, or we converge upwards by vaccinating the world. " 
It is clear that we are facing huge challenges and the current flexibilities and mechanisms are not 
adequate to enable the world to put an end to the pandemic with less than 3% of the people population 
has been fully vaccinated in the low -income countries.  We need to achieve a balanced outcome on the 
WTO response to the pandemic that includes an agreement on a TRIPS waiver that addresses the 
interests and concerns of all Members and that will highlight the important role the WTO can play in 
facilitating timely,  afforda ble and equitable access to vaccines and therapeutics to combat the 
pandemic.  
Turning to fisheries subsidies negotiations, we need to have a reality check and change the 
unsustainable status quo; According to the FAO, nearly 90% of fish stocks are used up. It is high time 
to show flexibility and common commitment, in order to close the remaining gaps in negotiations, and 
deliver on the mandate bearing in mind the different capacities of countries to do so. On this regard, 
we welcome the statement delivered by the Ambassador of Norway today pertaining to the common 
proposal of the African Group and ACP Group on SDT within the overcapacity and overfishing pillar.  A 
meaningful agreement on SDG 14.6 could be a turning point for the  oceans and for the well -being of 
those who depend on the oceans for livelihoods and nutrition.  On that vein, we command the relentless 
efforts of Ambassador Santiago Wills to gear up negotiations under an intensified work programme. 
And we remain committe d to achieve the objective affirmed by the ministers at July virtual meeting to 
produce a clean text of fisheries subsidy disciplines ahead of MC12.   
 
On agriculture, we thank the Chair of COAss for her efforts to move negotiations forward and for the 
report she circulated. As a Net Food Importing Developing Country with rapidly growing population, 
Egypt attaches great importance to reaching a meaningful outcome that prioritizes food security in line 
with our common objective of a no -poverty, zero -hunger wo rld within 9 years from now as mandated 
by SDGs 1 and 2 respectively. In this context, we call on Members to show the needed flexibility and 
give due consideration to the critical circumstances of NFIDCs and LDCs.  
 
Madame Chair, on development, we do appre ciate the sincere efforts by Ambassador Khadra Hassan 
and we reiterate our position that the G90 agreement specific proposals on SDT deserves a fresh 
look in the CTD -SS in the context of the pandemic and away from the political debate about special 
and dif ferential treatment.  
 
On WTO reform, we believe that any discussions about the reform of this house should put the 
developmental aspects at its core and we have to start with the historical imbalances in many areas 
that hinder the efforts of developing co untries in achieving industrialization and economic 
transformation. On the other hand, we call for resuming discussions to reach a compromise that will 
restore the dispute settlement function of our organization and guarantee that a reform process of 
this function will be finalized to take into consideration the concerns of some Members.  
 
To conclude Madame Chair, we are indeed faced by unprecedented challenges due to the 
repercussions of the pandemic. It is our collective responsibility to restore the cred ibility of the WTO 
and to achieve this aim  we believe that MC12 main focus should be on addressing the challenges of 
the pandemic in a manner that puts first the interests of developing countries and LDCs as they are 
the hardest hit by this global crisis.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 177 - 
 
  34. Nigeria  
 
Thank you Chair for your very comprehensive report and frank assessment of the situation in the 
ongoing negotiations at the WTO. We thank the GC Chair for his remark as well as Chairs of 
respective Committees for their reports. At the outset, we wish to associate ourselves with the 
statements by Mauritius and Jamaica on behalf of African Group and ACP respectively.  
 
Chair, we wish to reiterate that Nigeria is fully committed to continue with constructive engagement 
in the on -going negot iations on all the issues. This is with a view to ensuring convergence and a 
very successful outcome at MC12. We, therefore, urge all Members to do same.  
 
Madam Chair, there is no doubt that the divergence of positions of Members on various negotiating 
issues poses some threat to the anticipated success of MC12. It is therefore important for Members 
to refrain from actions that may lead to deadlock in MC12 if we really want the credibility of this 
institution to remain and indeed sustained. It is a known fa ct that every member has his position 
but in the spirit of solidarity, there must be room for flexibility and at this critical stage, we may not 
have any option than to forge heads together to mend the different interest that exist between 
Members in order  to reach agreement on pending issues,  
 
Madam Chair, permit me to give an example with the most recent development at the last meeting 
of the JSI on Services Domestic Regulations where Members agreed to remove brackets of all 
outstanding issues in the refe rence paper and collectively adopted the reference paper. I think this 
is what is expected of us in other WTO negotiating issues so that the MC 12 will be successful, and 
the credibility of the WTO could be sustained.  
 
Our delegation considers all the negotiating issues very important, ranging from Agriculture, 
Fisheries, DSU, Cotton, TRIPS Waiver, Trade and Development particularly SDT and we are always 
willing and ready for constructive engagements to ensure convergenc e and to have fruitful outcomes 
on them. However, the days to MC12 is very close and it will be very rare to bridge all the existing 
gabs in all the issues before the MC12. On this note, it is our view that Members must select few 
issues that presently hav e little gabs to concentrate on them as the issues that could be delivered 
for possible outcome at MC12 while the remaining issues could be loaded in the post MC12 work 
programme.  
 
Chair, MC12 avails the WTO an excellent opportunity to demonstrate its abil ity to deliver results that 
would speed up post COVID economic recovery, support building of resilient economies and underpin 
growth. Nigeria believes that a substantive outcome on issues that would address the developmental 
difficulties of Developing Coun tries would significantly contribute to its success. It would also 
enhance trust within the Membership and the credibility of the WTO, thereby paving the way for 
further progress in many other areas that are of interest to various individual and groups of 
Members.  
 
Let me touch on some few issues, starting with fisheries. Madam chair, so much has been discussed 
on fisheries. We, therefore, wish to call for urgent conclusion of the fisheries negotiations which can 
only be done if Members can show more flexi bility and bridge their differences to clean the text with 
a view to having fisheries subsidies issue as one of the major deliverables for MC12.  
 
On WTO response to Pandemic, we support the move by the WTO in appointing Ambassador David 
Walker to carry out  consultations with a view to sourcing for inputs from Members on what WTO can 
do in response to the pandemic. We are hopeful and envisaged that the report on the outcome of 
the consultations with TRIPS Waiver will be one of the outcomes in MC12.  
 
On Agric ulture, Nigeria have consistently maintained that Agriculture negotiations should be 
approach from development perspective, so we can achieve outcomes that addresses the structural 
causes of livelihood insecurity and foster the building of resilient Agricu ltural sector. Currently, the 
number of food insecure and undernourished persons globally has reached an alarming rate. Nigeria 
expect MC12 to deliver a mix of immediate outcomes that will equip Members with tools to address 
their food and livelihood secur ity difficulties; and post MC12 work programme on other issues. 
Nigeria expect MC12 to deliver a mix of immediate outcomes that will equip Members with tools to 
address their food and livelihood security difficulties; and post MC12 work programme on other 
issues.  The immediate outcomes should include decisions on: (i) capping and elimination of AMS 
above de -minimis; (ii)  elimination of any use of Final Bound AMS as product -specific cotton subsidies  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 178 - 
 
  (iii) PSH and SSM to address food security difficulties; an d (iv) Export Restrictions  relating to the 
World Food Programme (WFP) on the basis of the compromise text negotiated by the proponent and 
G90 as of 15th December 2020. Other issues could be considered as part of the post MC12 work 
programme.  
 
On Imposing C ustoms Duties on Electronic Transmissions , Nigeria look forward to the adoption of 
an inclusive MC12 Agenda that is geared towards addressing the difficulties undermining the gains 
of developing countries from global digital trade. Regarding the issue of M oratorium on Customs 
Duties, we support the renewal of the moratorium at MC12. This is to forestall the disruption of 
global e -commerce landscape and the negative effects on businesses and consumers that is likely 
to occur from the non -renewal of the moratorium at MC12. The Global economy is already shattered 
by CO VID, and the WTO should be part of the recovery efforts.  
 
In conclusion Chair, Nigeria is pleased with the progress being recorded in the ongoing open, 
transparent, and inclusive discussions under respective Joint Statement Initiatives. We wish to re -
empha size the need for the JSI negotiations to be approached from the perspective of development 
to avail Developing Countries the flexibilities and requisite tool to further unlock their economic 
potentials. We also expect Ministerial Declaration on MSMES, IFD , and Trade and Gender at MC12.  
 
35. Panama (Article XII Members)  
 
Thank you, Madam President. I am making this statement on behalf of the Group of Article XII 
Members. As we have already said in the previous statements, our Group expects that current 
negotiations should result in levelling the imbalances that have accumulated in Members ' 
commitments with each new accession negotiation. We believe that to reach a level playing field, all 
those Members that currently enjoy higher levels of entitlements, that  maintain significantly lower 
levels of commitments than those they asked of acceding Members, will have to make more 
significant contributions within the ongoing reforms process.   
 
To that end, the Group wants to recognize the efforts made by the Chair of  the CoA -SS in convening 
small group meetings to try to find convergence with Members. It is our hope that the Chair 's text 
will become more balanced as we continue with an open dialogue. Our Group stands ready to engage 
constructively in order to achieve a significant and balanced outcome at MC12.  
 
Lastly, we 're disappointed that we won 't have any new Accessions by MC12. Accessions used to be 
one of the main events of previous Ministerial Conferences because they strengthened the 
multilateral trading syste m and brought us closer to our goal of universal Membership. Chair, 
Accessions should also be viewed as important negotiation topics. We nevertheless reiterate our 
support to the ongoing accessions and hope that we can see new Members join the WTO next yea r. 
 
36. Republic of Korea  
 
Madame C hair (DG), I thank you, Chair of the General Council and chairs of the negotiating groups 
for sharing the reports.  
 
Importance of a successful MC12  
 
MC12 looms just around the corner.  As you indicated strikingly this morning, the current status of 
work in this house is indeed worrisome.  As we witnessed at this week 's Public Forum, people outside 
the WTO will be watching us keenly to see what we can deliver this time.  Now is the time to 
concentrate on key doable outcome s if we are to show to them that the WTO remains relevant and 
moves on forward into the future.  
 
Other than the obvious subject of the WTO 's response to the pandemic, I would like to highlight 
some of the key areas that Korea believes could be major outpu ts and where we should work 
constructively to obtain meaningful outcomes for MC12.  
  
Negotiation on Fisheries Subsidies  
 
First on Fisheries Subsidies, Korea appreciates the efforts you and Amb assador  Wills have been 
making for a successful conclusion of t he negotiation. After the summer break, Members are actively WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 179 - 
 
  putting forward new proposals, which is good.  However, Members should avoid presenting proposals 
that would require complete rewriting of key components in our negotiation at this critical stage.   
 
The current text is already a 'compromise ' that we have achieved after enduring negotiations.  The 
text was generally supported by Ministers last July as the basis for further negotiations.  Let's 
continue to work together based on this existing draft tex t to improve the clarity of the disciplines 
we want to develop, including SDT provisions, which are intended to facilitate the implementation, 
rather than expand the exemption from the common responsibilities.  After all, sustainability is the 
centerpiece o f our collective efforts to stop the depletion of fish stocks.  
  
Agriculture  
 
Regarding Agriculture, Korea appreciates the Chair 's efforts to move forward based on the draft text 
she prepared. Despite Members ' tireless efforts and intensive discussions, fu rther progress seems 
to be lacking. My delegation will continue to engage in the negotiations in a constructive manner.  In 
order to achieve meaningful outcomes before MC12, Members may wish to be more pragmatic and 
focus on a few key concrete deliverables,  which may include the World Food Program exemption on 
foodstuff purchased for humanitarian purposes and enhanced transparency without increasing the 
burden of Members.   
 
JSIs 
 
Chair, it is encouraging that progress has been made in many different areas of JSI negotiations.  
My delegation continues to call for the broadest possible engagement of Members in the ongoing JSI 
negotiations.  
  
On Domestic Regulations, Korea welcomes the conclusion of the negotiations on Reference Paper in 
the plenary meeti ng last Monday. We hope that all participating Members can submit their final 
indicative schedule by the end of October. While welcoming Singapore 's participation, I hope many 
other Members will follow suit.  
 
Korea will also continue to take active part in  negotiations on investment facilitation to achieve as 
much progress as possible by MC12.  Some of the key remaining issues on investment facilitation 
have systemic implications for the WTO and, therefore, deserve the attention of the broader 
Membership: th ese include whether or not to have an MFN provision and the extent of SDT. In 
particular, I encourage delegations that have been calling for making SDT provisions more precise, 
effective and operational, to take part in these negotiations and help make sur e that future 
agreements contain appropriate SDT provisions that are commensurate with needs.   
  
Trade and Environment  
 
Chair, thank you for mentioning the importance of trade and climate change. Korea believes that at 
MC12 the WTO should send a clear mess age of its commitment to address climate change, which is 
the biggest existential challenge facing humanity.   
 
In this regard, my delegation would like to underline the importance of the ongoing efforts to identify 
possible elements for the TESSD Ministeri al Declaration at MC12. Korea welcomes the current work 
Members have been undertaking to set out commitments on future work for trade and environmental 
sustainability and to reflect them in the Ministerial document.  We look forward to the concrete 
outcome coming from this process.  
 
Dispute Settlement Body 
 
Last but not least, the restoration of a binding, two -tier dispute settlement system of the WTO should 
be a main priority for the entire Membership.  To build momentum for deeper discussion aimed at 
making the entire functions of the WTO operational, we should now start to work together to devise 
a viable work plan with specific timelines . 
 
37. Pakistan  
 
Thank you, Chair. Allow me to make this statement on behalf of Ambassador Piracha of Pakistan 
who had to step out due to an urgent commitment.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 180 - 
 
   
Pakistan would like to thank the chairs of the negotiating groups for their reports. Chair, we thank 
you in particular for your initial remarks, especially for highlighting the peculiar challenges that many 
developing countries are facing. I can speak for my own country that those challenges, in wake of 
geo-political events and severe debt problems augmented by the difficulties of the pandemic 
resonate very strongly in my capital. It is, therefore, with these d evelopmental and restructuring 
challenges in mind that I address our gathering today. Exactly two months from the Ministerial 
Conference, we should reflect on what we can and really want to achieve at the M inisterial 
Conference . Indeed, these are testing t imes and we have to ask what is it that we can salvage, 
which will show the world that the WTO can still make a positive difference to poor peoples ' lives 
across the globe.  
 
Chair, it is getting close to one year since the cosponsors tabled the TRIPS waiv er proposal, and the 
pandemic continues unabated. Precious lives continue to be lost mostly in the developing world 
despite the high vaccination percentages in rich countries. It is unfortunate that after an initial 
expression of joining text -based negotia tions on the proposal, some delegations find it convenient 
to kick the can down the road and stonewall any progress on the text. Pakistan recognises your 
effort, Chair, to find solutions for the vaccine shortages and the general fight against the pandemic.  
Pakistan had indicated that it is open to consider all options that are complementary and add on to 
the waiver. Over the course of more than a year, we have seen promises of equitable access and 
the supply of large quantities of doses to developing countr ies fall flat on their face. We are aware 
of, and are witnessing problems faced by developing countries in using existing flexibilities in the 
TRIPS agreement, and we have become cognizant of the severe limitations of voluntary licensing 
processes. After a ll our efforts and discussions, we find that the waiver is the only method that would 
quickly, efficiently, and comprehensively create the necessary environment for ramping up 
production and supply of vaccines in the developing world. We note that a parall el process is under 
way to build a WTO response to the pandemic and we appreciate the efforts of Ambassador Walker 
for that. However, unfortunately, the process is only focused on certain trade policy aspects. While 
Pakistan has been very actively particip ating in that process, we wish to emphasise that, any WTO 
response would be meaningless and toothless without the TRIPS waiver as its integral component.  
 
While our attempts at saving lives are finding strategic roadblocks, our convergence on saving fish 
also needs tremendous work. Chair, we commend your efforts and those of the NGR Chair to find 
solutions. However, fundamental gaps and imbalances still remain. Most important among these, 
Chair, is the realisation of where the original problem lies. Those t hat have been consistently 
depleting marine resources due to their heavily subsidised deep sea, industrial fishing activities 
cannot be treated alike with those that engage in coastal, subsistence and artisanal fishing. The 
sustainability objective, in our  view can only be read in one way – that is to curtail subsidies to 
overcapacity and overfishing of those that actually engage in such activities at length. The 
responsibilities, while common must be differentiated with polluters paying, and paying first. Special 
and Differential Treatment must remain unconditional, meaningful, and effective. We hope that in 
the coming weeks, these objectives will find some traction in negotiations to build momentum for a 
conclusion.  
 
Similarly, in Agriculture, Pakistan has  been engaging actively and constructively in various groups 
to highlight aspects of a meaningful solution. However, without very large subsidisers agreeing to 
cut domestic support, movement will be difficult. At the same time, livelihood, and food securit y 
concerns in developing countries continue to mount in wake of the pandemic and, therefore, the 
need for levelling the playing field in agriculture trade remains paramount. An ambitious outcome 
on Cotton is necessary and so are the specific entitlements f or developing countries under article 
6.2 and the interests of NFIDCs.  
 
Briefly on some other areas, we are disappointed to note that efforts to find outcomes on other 
developmental aspects such as the mandated negotiations in the CTD SS are facing stiff r esistance. 
Special and differential treatment remains integral to all current and future negotiations and further 
progress in this area is essential for any agreement.  
 
In the area of services, a correct understanding of the so -called built -in agenda is n ecessary. The 
original mandate for such negotiations from Doha, and any developmental approaches including 
areas of interest to developing countries must not be ignored.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 181 - 
 
  The multilateral work programme on E -Commerce must be reinvigorated in all relevant councils, and 
before the extension of the moratorium it must be discussed threadbare for its various implications 
for developing countries.  
 
The impasse in the DSB cannot be left unresolved and we must restore the Appellate Body to its full 
function. Clear  directions at MC12 on that would be very useful.  
 
In all areas, Chair, we must move our organisation towards larger trade and sustainable 
development ideals, mandated in the Marrakech agreement and subsequent multilateral 
declarations. Any reform, theref ore, must not focus on small, self -serving areas but strengthen the 
fundamentals of the organisation and of multilateralism.  
 
Finally, on MC12 logistics, we thank you Chair for providing some information. We understand that 
we are aiming for an in -person M inisterial. Our capital has been informed of this understanding. 
However, several questions are surfacing e.g. on pre -vaccinations, certification requirements, 
arrangements for testing and contingencies during the Ministerial, participation of small delega tions 
due to complex travel and flight restrictions etc. It would be useful if answers to such questions and 
any arrangements could be provided to ease concerns.  
 
To conclude Chair, MC12 will be a stiff test for our delegations and our organisation. We rem ain 
hopeful and extend our faith in the Membership to deliver on the objectives of sustainable 
development, greater technological capabilities and production capacities leading to higher 
standards of living in developing countries which ensure prosperity f or all. At the same time, we 
remain wary that if such developmental objectives continue to be thwarted, the organisation may 
risk losing its charm for those that believed in its fundamental ideals.  
 
38. Hong Kong, China  
 
Thank you, Director -General, for your frank assessment and sharing.  I would also like to thank the 
various Negotiating Group and Committee Chairs for their comprehensive reports. Today, I am going 
to focus on four priority issues for the coming MC12.  
 
Fisheries Subsi dies Negotiations  
 
First, fisheries subsidies.  While it is encouraging to see Members ' positive engagements after the 
summer break, as other Members have pointed out, we have seen little movement on the 
outstanding major issues.  We hope that Members will continue to work constructively together to 
resolve the outstanding differences and ach ieve meaningful and balanced outcomes in this long 
overdue initiative by MC12.   
 
WTO's Response to the Pandemic  
 
On the WTO 's response to the pandemic, Hong Kong, China (HKC) is pleased to see that Members 
have been deepening their engagement under the Fac ilitator -led process.  We highly appreciate 
Members ' contributions and efforts as well as Ambassador Walker 's leadership.  Looking ahead, we 
will continue to work with Members in a constructive and pragmatic manner, so as to produce 
meaningful outcomes in th is important subject by MC12.  
 
E-commerce Moratorium  
 
Turning to e -commerce.  For more than two decades, the moratorium on customs duties on electronic 
transmissions has underpinned a stable, predictable and conducive environment for international e -
commerc e. Hong Kong, China would reiterate our support for making this moratorium permanent, 
and if such a consensus could not be forged in time by MC12, we believe the moratorium should be 
extended further until at least the following Ministerial Conference. Suc h a decision is critical to 
avoiding unnecessary disruptions to the global e -commerce environment during the current 
pandemic, it will also be essential to the post -pandemic global economic recovery.  
 
Dispute Settlement System  
 
Finally, on the dispute set tlement system.  We share many other Members ' views that we should 
take concrete steps to restoring a fully functioning two -tier WTO dispute settlement system, which WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 182 - 
 
  is a key pillar of the rules -based multilateral trading system.  Members should agree on a w ork 
programme by MC12 for resolving the prolonged impasse in the Appellate Body.   
 
39. Chinese Taipei  
 
We agree that the coming MC12 is not merely another ordinary Ministerial Conference. It could be 
one of the most important Conferences due to the pressing issues we are encountering. It is the 
Members ' collective responsibility to ensure its success. Altho ugh we have important progress in 
some areas, we face some serious difficulties in various key areas. We have reasons for great 
concerns.  
 
On the fisheries subsidies negotiation, we are pleased to see that the intensive text -based 
discussions led by Ambassador Wills is progressing. But we also see some proposals which are not 
to bridge the already -divided positions. We urge Members to engage in comp romises based on the 
Chair 's current text at this final stage, so as to avoid the most undesirable outcome of failing to 
conclude a fisheries subsides agreement.  
 
Regarding the issue of the pandemic, we appreciate the leadership by Ambassador Walker. We 
consider the facilitator -led process very useful and productive. We look forward to a text -based 
discussion for an outcome document on  the WTO's response to the COVID -19 Pandemic.  
 
In our view, concluding a fisheries subsidies agreement , plus adopting an out come document on 
WTO response to the pandemic , are the benchmark for the whole world to judge whether we have 
a successful MC12.  
 
In addition, we would like to emphasize again that continuous modernization and making the WTO 
rules up -to-date is a critical responsibility we collectively bear. Concrete results of the Joint 
Statement Initiatives (JSIs) at MC12 are a big plus contributing to the success of MC12 for such 
purpose. We should be able to expect that there will be some meaningful outcomes from these 
initiatives at MC12.  
 
On WTO reform, we agree that ensuring the well-functioning of the WTO is of high importance. We 
hope to see possible work program mes so that we can start working on the reform issues after 
MC12.  
 
Finally, a successful MC12 is of highe st importance for the WTO to signal to the world that this 
Organization continues to contribute to global trade, to sustainable development and even to saving 
lives and livelihood.  It is urgent for Members to rebuild the solidarity and the already deterior ated 
mutual trust.  
 
40. Nepal  
 
Thank you Chair for convening this meeting and giving me the floor. I appreciate you for the 
comprehensive briefing on the state of the play in trade negotiations and suggesting some way 
forwards. I commend all the Chairs of the Negotiating Bodies for thei r updates in respective areas.  
 
While going through the discussion during the month and views shared by Chairs of different bodies 
in today 's meeting, my delegation noticed that all Members are dedicated to achieving some visible 
results through the upcomi ng Ministerial conference. However, it seems difficult to get there without 
showing flexibility by departing from our preoccupied divergent positions.  
 
Discussions among Members at various formal, informal, small group and bilateral meetings and 
consultat ions have helped in narrowing the gaps in different sectors. However, it seems that we are 
still not in a position to take any landmark decision through the upcoming MC12 which is much 
awaited to rebuild trust in the WTO and deliver result for the benefit of the most suffered and 
disadvantaged people at this critical situation.  
 
This requires expeditious discussions and dialogues in a more pragmatic and result focused manner 
with a view to enlarging the size of total benefit of our deliberation to the peop le at large across the 
globe instead of just focusing on particular group of people of our own countries.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 183 - 
 
  I wish to associate my statement with the statements delivered by Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group; 
Mongolia, on behalf of the LLDC group; and Panam a, on behalf of the Article XII group, and in the 
context of the MC12, I would like to briefly highlight few priority areas as below which are more 
relevant to the people of my country and hope equally relevant to others having similar situation to 
my coun try:  
 
First, e -commerce and digital economy are growing rapidly and taking significant space in the global 
economy especially during the COVID -19 pandemic. However, my country as an LDC and LLDC has 
not been able to participate in and benefit from the glo bal trade due to huge digital divide, and 
institutional and technology gaps. Integrating business communities into national, regional and 
global value -chains through development and utilization of e -commerce has become urgent. 
Therefore, special support me asures with concrete work programme becomes essential to bridge 
digital and capacity gaps, and enhance productive capacity and export competitiveness in LDCs and 
LLDCs, which my delegation expect from the MC12.  
 
Second, if this organization does not deliv er any concrete result to respond to the COVID -19 
pandemic and take needful decision for future course of action with a view to designing a long -term 
solution for any future pandemic, this institution will no longer be trusted by the majority of the 
world population who are currently expecting something from us to deliver.  
 
Third, the WTO is in a dire need of reform to bridge huge gaps in the existing WTO laws and system 
and adjust the changing context of the global trade regime. Huge gap in current laws a nd system 
among different groups of the M embership and discriminatory practices through the accession 
process between the founding and acceding Members need to be improved to ensure a fair, rule -
based, predictable and inclusive world trading system. In thi s context, I would like to recall my views 
expressed in earlier meetings and reiterate for constituting a working group with a special mandate 
and fixed timeline to deal with all reform agenda through the MC12.  
 
Fourth, the development dimension is an inherent of the multilateral trade as reflected in the 
Marrakesh Agreement. Therefore, the MC12 needs to deliver positive aspiration and hope among 
the people of the planet with some good indication. We may not be ab le to resolve all the 
development related issues in this short time. However, few prioritized areas taking from the 
submission of G90 can be delivered.  
 
Finally, LDCs and LLDCs are the most disadvantaged groups of  the Membership to participate in and 
benefit from the world trading system. They face unique challenges and difficulties in their 
development endeavours and these groups further remain the hardest hit by the pandemic. 
Therefore, a  clear road map with special package of additional support measures  for LDCs and LLDCs 
is absolutely necessary for levelling the playing field. Expediting the implementation of existing 
supports for LDCs with some additional package of build forward resilient, adopting the L DC group 's 
submission on Trade -related challenge s of the LDCs and way forward regarding extending the 
existing support to graduated LDCs for 12 years after graduation; and incorporation of LLDC specific 
work programme in the MC12 outcomes would be some areas of our priority for the consideration 
of MC12 in favour of LDCs and LLDCs.   
 
41. Canada (Structured Discussions on Trade and Environmental Sustainability and 
Ottawa Group)  
 
First, let me note that today, 30 September, marks Canada's first ever National Day of Truth and 
Reconciliation. This day is an opportunity to honour the missing children and survivors of residential 
schools, their families and their communities. Public commemoration of the tragic and painful history 
of residential schools and their lasting legacy is an  essential part of the reconciliation process in 
Canada. Today, Canada remembers.  
 
Turning now to the TNC work, I will provide a report of the work under the Trade and Environmental 
Sustainability Structured Discussions (TESSD), an update on the activities  Ottawa Group, and a few 
thoughts on behalf of Canada.  
 
TESSD co -sponsors, other WTO Members, and outside stakeholders met on 17 September to discuss 
elements for a draft MC12 ministerial statement on trade and environmental sustainability and to 
seek fee dback. As co -Chairs, Canada and Costa Rica will reflect on the input received and come back 
to co-sponsors and interested Members with guidance on next steps.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 184 - 
 
   
The objective of the statement, which we hope will be supported by as many Members as possible,  
is to articulate a desire to advance our understanding of issues at the nexus of trade and 
environmental sustainability; to lay out a roadmap for our work after MC12; and to underline the 
importance of working transparently and collaboratively with outsid e stakeholders and experts.  
 
Regarding the Ottawa Group, we continue to pursue reform -minded results at the WTO. In that 
regard, our vice -ministers met virtually on 29 September  to continue discussions on WTO reform 
with a view to helping ensure successfu l outcomes at MC12, including on fisheries subsidies 
negotiations, and beyond. Ottawa Group vice -ministers focussed their discussion on trade and health 
issues, including a reaffirmation of their commitment to the principles contained in the Trade and 
Heath Declaration and the importance of a strong multilateral outcome at MC12 on the WTO 's 
response to the pandemic . Vice -ministers also discussed how to best to prepare for the work beyond 
MC12.   
 
Ottawa Group ministers will meet next on the margins of the O ECD trade ministerial meeting on 
6 October.  The Ottawa Group has advanced work on critical issues and continued to push forward 
on WTO reform. We are firmly committed to carrying on this work ahead of MC12 and beyond to 
ensure action on issues of systemic importance.  
 
42. Canada  
 
I would also like to share Canada 's brief observations, as Canada has shared its views widely already, 
in a variety of configurations.  
 
As we move closer to the ministerial conference, we need to deepen our understanding of the issues 
behind our different positions and then identify concrete ideas to bridge the differences we have on 
these issues. Canada would urge all Members to focus on a realistic package for MC12 that includes 
an agreement on fisheries su bsidies, a multilateral declaration on trade and health, demonstrable 
progress in the agriculture negotiations, including an outcome on an ambitious framework on 
domestic support and enhancements to transparency, and the conclusion of the joint statement 
initiative on services domestic regulation. Building on our longstanding past practices, Canada 
believes both moratoria should be extended. We also strongly believe that the WTO dispute 
settlement system is a central pillar of the rules -based multilateral t rading system. We need to send 
a positive message at MC12 regarding our collective intention to ensure an improved and fully 
functioning dispute settlement system.  
 
This remains our goal and we share your hope, DG, that Members will engage in a focussed ma nner 
to advance work in the right direction.  
 
43. Uganda  
 
Thank you, Chair, for the speech this morning and for the comments on the meetings that you held 
with regards to the pandemic, in particular. For Uganda this is an incredibly worrying situation not 
just within the trade and health sector but within our edu cation sector that is now closed and has 
been closed for almost 18 months. I understand that this may not be necessarily a trade concern, 
but I would like to borrow from Norway and from Mauritius, my colleagues, who mentioned that as 
we consider the pandem ic and the issues to be discussed at MC12 we consider the education of our 
children. We have no future beyond climate change if our children are not educated because of our 
limited or no access to the vaccines.  
 
In terms of access to the vaccines, we are very delighted to hear that you are having conversations 
with the Congress, the White House, with Ways and Means and with Committees that we hope will 
move forward on domestic and other legislation, but we ask as you come back to Geneva and have 
various co nversations with WIPO, WHO and yourself to consider that a mini elite system is being 
created with the vaccine certificate.  
 
I share the Ugandan experience, where we do not have the choices, we either accept AstraZeneca 
manufactured in India or COVAX or S inovac and our children would like to go to school, our parents 
would like for our children to travel and have other experiences that they are not able to do so at 
the moment. Our ministers would like to travel as mentioned by my colleague but in the reque st, 
and I completely understand the European manufacturing authority requesting that only certain WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 185 - 
 
  vaccines be accepted for meetings, restaurants, organizations and for education. What happens is 
that we begin to create a very elite system where in my count ry 260.000 people are vaccinated that 
means only 1% of my population can travel, come to a meeting, walk into a restaurant because the 
vaccine certificate is not accepted, soon we will not be able to board planes because the right vaccine 
has not been issu ed. We ask that this is not lost in translation during the conversations that you are 
having with the various organizations and countries of nonmanufacturing.  
 
Going into the manufacturing agreements we note that our colleagues in Africa are working hard to 
be a part of the manufacturing conversation and the IP conversation. There is a possibility as Aspen, 
GSK and Johnson & Johnson has shown in South Africa for end manufacturing production where 
Johnson & Johnson was able to manufacture with Aspen and has  a contract for 20 million viable 
doses and is manufacturing to the EU and to other countries. What we hope is that these agreements 
are more transparent, that the data that comes out includes purchasing agreements and not just 
the donation and we ask you as you consider to share with us the information on the dialogues that 
you are having to have data for us to take back home prior to MC12, including the LLDC study, 
Uganda is part of the land locked community and we would like to have these numbers articul ated 
prior to our delegation's arrival in Geneva so as to know transparently whether these are purchasing 
agreement whether these are donations and what conversations are happening in terms of the IP 
Waiver.  
 
In terms of deliverables, I would like to reit erate everything my colleague has said to the Fisheries 
Committee and to the Chair. My first market ever as a child, an African child, was a fish market. 
Uganda is house to the River Nile and to the Lake Victoria and the river Nile is huge, fish for us is 
huge. We reiterate what the African Group has mentioned prior, but we also are looking to work 
with you more consistently as we begin to go into the text. We thank you for your work, we ask that 
you do not give up, we truly appreciated what the Chair said,  aim for success, I have not said it 
quite the way you said it, but we should look towards success or to James Bond. Those were my 
comments to fisheries in particular and that was my first market, so if there is anything we can do 
as a country within the A frican Group or as a country we are willing to work with you for the text, 
21 years later. I would like to go back and tell my mother about her market.  
 
Finally, Chair, we really want to thank you for your leadership, we are vice co -chairs with Barbados 
and look forward to working with you, my minister and my country are very much looking forward 
to the success of the MC12.  
 
44. Viet Nam  
 
First, Viet Nam would like to thank You, Madam Director General for convening this meeting and 
your assessment and shar ing. We also thank Chairs of Negotiating Bodies for their respective 
comprehensive reports.  
 
It is indeed important that Members constructively engage for deliverables at MC12, proving that 
the WTO, the multilateral trading system is relevant in tackling pressing global challenges, 
particularly in contributing for inclusive recovery from the C OVID -19 pandemic. I assure you that 
Viet Nam continues to support multilateralism and a successful MC12.  
 
Second, regarding Fisheries Subsidies Negotiations, we appre ciate the efforts of the Chair of the 
Negotiating Group as well as many Members to engage intensively on the textual submissions and 
discussions, especially in recent weeks.  
 
Since there is little time left, we recommend that different positions be revisi ted rigorously to show 
necessary flexibility and find the landing zones.  
 
Third, the demonstration of the WTO 's concrete and effective response to the pandemic by the MC12 
is a common goal of the Membership. We are pleased that the outline that the Facili tator of the 
multilateral process Ambassador Walker shared with us on various chances is gradually fleshing out. 
We underline the necessity for the WTO response to be inclusive and meaningful.  
 
Fourth, we note that consultations on the MC12 Outcome Docume nt is gaining momentum as it is 
an important document to show our solidarity and unity at the MC12. We appreciate the General 
Council Chair 's efforts to conduct the consultations in an effective manner to keep constant attention 
of the Membership on key ne gotiating topics. For the political message of solidarity embedded in the WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 186 - 
 
  document to be delivered to the world, we support a necessary level of ambiguity in textual 
formulation to avoid getting Members delving in contentious issues.  
 
Finally, my delegatio n reiterates  that Viet Nam supports multilateralism and reaffirms our 
commitment to work closely and constructively with You, and with other Members for the steady 
preparations towards the successful MC12.  
 
45. Colombia  
 
I am making this statement on behalf of Ambassador Santiago Wills, who in this session is focusing 
on his work as Chair of the negotiations on fisheries subsidies. The Delegation of Colombia thanks 
the chairs of the negotiating groups for their reports and for their dedica ted work aimed at achieving 
concrete outcomes for the Ministerial Conference.  
 
In this statement we would like to call for the recognition of the short time remaining and the 
challenges facing us, and therefore the need to focus efforts and acknowledge fro m here onwards 
the different levels of ambition by sector for MC12.  
 
It is a priority for Colombia and for Members to reach an ambitious and definitive agreement on 
fisheries  subsidies. Finalizing this agreement should be our main objective, and the issue on which 
most of the energies and resources available in the next two months should be focused. Fisheries 
must be our highest ambition. It is about concrete disciplines; it is about a new agreement; it is 
about regaining the status of the Organization as a  viable negotiating forum; it is about contributing 
to sustainability in the midst of a climate crisis. We must deepen the text -based negotiations, and 
the discussions must be based on the current Chair's text. The time to deliver on the ministerial 
mandat e and the SDGs is now, not later, and we must be flexible in order to move forward. For 
example, although we are not proponents and it is not our preference, as we have stated so far, we 
would be willing to review the de minimis  proposal, echoing the posit ion expressed today by Norway 
and its reasons.  
 
Regarding agriculture, it has always been essential for Colombia to move forward on disciplines, 
especially those relating to domestic support, not only because of their distorting effect but also 
because of the enormous impact they have on the environment. With little time left for MC12, 
Colombia believes that the most sensible thing to do is to agree on the fundamentals and lay the 
groundwork for new disciplines. The Chair's text provides the key elements an d includes ALL views, 
from the entire Membership, without including specific modalities, which is sensible. So, Colombia 
considers it vital to use the Chair's text to achieve consensus and lay the concrete basis for future 
work. Colombia has been proactive  in this regard. For example, on the issue of PSH, not being a 
proponent, it has discussed the possibility of a negotiating framework, presented by principles 
derived from the text; we believe that this could be a good way out. Talking about what is not ou r 
preference is crucial at this time, but it is important that we all do our bit; it is not possible to achieve 
a quid pro quo by receiving alone and without giving anything in return.  
 
Regarding the JSIs, we would like to express our optimism and support for the level of progress we 
are seeing in all the initiatives, and most especially in the Joint Initiative on Services Domestic 
Regulation where, as already mentioned, participants concluded discussions on the text, and we are 
ready to take the ne xt step towards improving Schedules of specific trade disciplines.  
 
Regarding trade and health and the WTO response to the pandemic, Colombia, along with a group 
of Latin American countries, has expressed on several occasions its deep concern about various  
trade practices and export restrictions that hinder and limit the importation of vaccines, lead to 
hoarding in producing countries, and trigger vaccine tourism and the poor distribution of vaccines 
around the world. Better discipline in this regard is cri tical as part of the pandemic response package.  
 
Finally, with respect to the initiatives for WTO reform, Colombia considers that this is a key issue for 
the relevance and future prospects of the rules -based trading system and must be resolved by MC13. 
We must therefore agree, at a minimum, on a structured work programme that finds solutions to 
the Dispute Settlement Body and the variable geometry of the organization, as other Members have 
proposed.  
 
In conclusion, Madam Director -General, we wished to highl ight the importance of calibrating the 
different levels of ambition that are feasible and of spending our scarce time in a focused manner. WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 187 - 
 
  MC12 should see us with a practical and pragmatic solution that ensures the Organization remains 
relevant.  
 
46. Boliv arian Republic of Venezuela  
 
The Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela welcomes the convening of this meeting, your activity report 
and the reports of the chairs of the negotiating groups.  
 
With the Twelfth Ministerial Conference only a few weeks away, we wish to reiterate our full support 
for the WTO, at a time when it is crucial to demonstrate the pivotal role played by the WTO in the 
multilateral trading system. In particular, we support every effort that can be made by this 
Organization to address the negati ve consequences of the COVID -19 pandemic.  
 
We must change the prevailing economic system of exploitation and consumption that promotes 
segregation and discrimination. This can be seen in the uneven distribution of vaccines globally in 
response to a pandemi c that has been shown to be indiscriminate. Before the United  Nations  (UN) 
General Assembly on 17  September  2021, the Director -General of the World Health Organization 
(WHO) warned that, although more than 5.7  billion vaccine doses have been administered g lobally, 
73% of all doses have been administered in just 10 countries. High -income countries have 
administered 61 times more doses per inhabitant than low -income countries. We therefore hope for 
a prompt outcome regarding the waiver of certain provisions o f the Agreement on the Trade -Related 
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) for the prevention, containment and treatment of 
COVID -19. 
 
Another of our priorities is to strengthen all the functions of the Organization, including that of trade 
negot iations, in order to achieve tangible results that allow for the creation of new rules governing 
international trade, with a vision linked to cooperation, development and respect for the 
self-determination of peoples. In our opinion, the key element is to rebuild trust among Members, 
by making it clear that any outcome must be inclusive.  
 
We are therefore committed to achieving results in the negotiations on fisheries subsidies. We are 
convinced that the success of these negotiations depends on our response s to the elements set out 
in the negotiating mandate reflected in Sustainable Development Goal Target 14.6, especially the 
inclusion of special and differential treatment, which is appropriate and effective for the developing 
and least developed countries,  and we therefore hope to achieve more flexible rules on artisanal and 
small -scale fishing.  
 
With regard to the other negotiating areas, we look forward to substantive outcomes in agriculture, 
especially in public stockholding for food security purposes and the special safeguard mechanism. 
Concerning the negotiations on special and differential treatment (SDT), we hope for the adoption 
of results based on the G90 proposals, which our country supports. The vision reiterated by 
Venezuela for SDT is  that it should not be limited to granting grace periods and providing technical 
cooperation to developing countries. It must also allow countries to continue to implement "active" 
development policies, which should translate into concrete actions and prov isions, to prevent that 
treatment being watered down into merely declarative principles.  
 
Regarding the other functions of the WTO, we consider it vital to launch the selection processes for 
Appellate Body vacancies. We encourage the Member that opposes th is process to reflect and to 
contribute to the prompt restoration of the work of this body and to dispute settlement in general.  
 
We are well placed to move forward in all the negotiations and to ensure that the WTO fulfils all the 
functions for which it w as created, in keeping with the principles agreed in this Organization, 
respecting consensus and abiding by the negotiating mandates. It is crucial that all Members be 
taken into consideration, their diversity recognized and their right to move forward on the 
development path best suited to their realities respected. We cannot afford another failure that 
would move us further away from the objectives agreed by our Ministers at the previous 
Ministerial  Conferences. Two -way communication is important, speakin g and listening, to 
understand the different capacities that WTO Members have to implement "active" development 
policies, which can translate into concrete actions and provisions on the matters agreed upon in the 
negotiating mandates, preventing any subseq uent dilution into commitments that cannot be fulfilled.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 188 - 
 
  Mistrust in the Organization grows as the list of unresolved issues gets longer. We will fight for the 
Organization to be able to address the trade concerns of all its Members, including the 
impleme ntation of illegal and criminal unilateral coercive measures, which have a negative impact 
on all sectors, especially food, health, transport, communication and technology. Our ultimate 
objective is to ensure a fair multilateral trading system that is reli able and respectful of States' 
sovereignty, as well as to obtain the benefit promised under the Agreement that created the WTO.  
 
47. Sri Lanka  
 
Let my delegation also joins others in thanking the Director -General  for your leadership in convening 
the meeting and also laying the key challenges before us with your best prescription, which you 
foresee could be the best way to take us towards achieving meaningful, balanced and fair outcomes 
at MC12.  
 
Like the speakers  who spoke before me, Sri Lanka wishes to appreciate the reports and updates 
presented by GC Chair and other Chairs of all negotiating bodies and share their sober assessments 
on the progress being made and the complex nature of issues that are still pendi ng to be resolved.  
 
Sri Lanka wishes that all Members could be as optimistic as you are as to what we can and really 
want to achieve at the MC12. But it needs to be borne in mind that we are still divided as to the list 
of Members ' priorities where they s eek outcomes at MC12, that are capable of salvaging the image 
of the WTO as the sole custodian of the MTS, and to show the world that the WTO can still make a 
positive difference to poor people, lives across the globe.  
 
In line of this, Sri Lanka wishes t o share what it sees as its priorities.   
 
First, Chair, the world is paying a heavy price, both in human and financial aspects, until the desired 
equity in availability and distribution of vaccine for COVID -19 is found. Though Sri Lanka had great 
optimism that the solution could be achieved as soon as possible through the proposed TRIPS waiver, 
after assessing the progress the Members made so far in the TRIPS Council under the guidance of 
its Chair, such ray of hopes are slowly disappearing indicating that we may be heading towards 
another debacle at MC12. Would other WTO responses to COVID -19 Pandemic suggested under the 
Ambassador Walker process be capable enough to reverse it, it is yet to be seen. I echo the words 
expressed by the delegation Pakistan in this regard.  
 
Since the proposals tabled by the co -sponsors over an year ago, which also followed an initial 
expression of joining text -based negotiations on the proposal by non -proponents, the WTO still fails 
to lay at least the principles or an outline of a possible modality that would help Members addressing 
this health crisis, so that the WTO can play one of the most significant roles at all times by offering 
a multilateral solution that ensures affordable access to the vaccine and requisite technologi es. This 
would give us an opportunity to build back more equal and sustainable sources of supplies as we 
continue to live with the pandemic in many more years to come.  
 
Sri Lanka also recognizes your efforts, Chair, to find solutions for the vaccine short ages and the 
general fight against the pandemic and commend your genuine efforts finding an outcome. Further, 
as there appears to be two parallel processes that are ongoing in relation to affordable access to the 
vaccine and requisite technologies, as dist inguished Ambassador of South Africa stated, it is 
imperative that we align those processes at one point leading up to an outcome at MC12.   
 
Madam Chair, the TNC had been established under the DDA with a view to delivering on critical 
issues that promoted development. The DDA is not limited to the fisheries negotiations. Meaningful 
outcomes in all the outstanding issues, particular in agriculture, under PSH and SSM are needed to 
be delivered, which is our preferred second priority area.  
 
This is critical for progress and for the WTO to contribute meaningfully to people's livelihoods, food 
security, sustainable development and job creation, we therefore not in a position to agree on 
disciplines to curtail the Article 6.2 domestic support in  the guise of disciplining the distortive 
domestic support. MC12 should deliver a mix of immediate outcomes and a work programme for 
future work. The outcomes should include a decision on capping and on eliminating AMS above de -
minimis. Other expected outc omes should include a permanent solution on PSH – a critical food 
security support instrument, at least an interim solution on SSM to enable Members to deal with the 
challenging issues of price volatility and import surge.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 189 - 
 
   
Third, in relation to S&DT, the  G-90 revised proposals are a genuine attempt to address real and 
specific challenges facing developing countries in their quest to participate in global trade and 
industrialize. Sri Lanka wishes to see a meaningful outcome on this important mandated and l ong 
standing issue at MC12.  
 
Fourth, on fisheries subsidies negotiations, while appreciating the efforts of the NGR Chair taken so 
far aiming for a balanced outcome, the process cannot be blind to the unprecedented challenges and 
the need to ensure that t he process is transparent, inclusive and allow for Members to get actively 
and meaningfully engaged.  
 
The disciplines are required to deliver on all pillars of the mandate, target distant water and large 
scale, industrial fishing and not constrain the dev eloping countries on use of beneficial subsidies that 
contribute to the sustainability of fish stocks, safeguard food security and livelihoods of coastal 
communities, including policy space to develop their marine resources.  
 
Sri Lanka is an active advocator and is contributing to the discussion to reach a balanced and fair 
outcome building on the key principles of Common, But, Differentiated Responsibilities and S&DT, 
which is an integral part of the mandate so as the outcome. The perceived imbalanc es in many 
articles are still persisting, including in Article 5 of the DCT and genuine desire to address them 
sooner rather than later will lead us towards a path of outcomes instead of a derailed or a failed 
process.  Today we witness a genuine effort bei ng made by Norway, when it laid its perspective on 
the ways and means of achieving the sustainability, while addressing the root causes that created 
to current status of the fishery resources.   
 
Proposals being submitted by Members should be accorded equal  treatment in the negotiations and 
valid criteria should also be used in picking the countries for small and closed door meetings. In 
saying so, we value the proposals presented by the ACP Group and India recently, which add very 
timely and pertinent formu lations that help us addressing the perceived imbalances.  
 
Equally, we need to see further positive movements from other Members that would take us towards 
certain landing zones. In this regard, Sri Lanka is willing to work constructively with the Chair 
towards a balanced outcome that delivers on the mandate.  
 
Finally on the proposal made by the Ambassador of Mauritius today on the high freight cost of 
containerized shipping, Sri Lanka wishes to support all such efforts which WTO is aiming to tackle, as 
you mentioned today, under your leadership.  
 
Madam chair, containerized shipping underpins the transport and delivery of global manufactured goods, 
including inputs, parts, components and consumer goods. On the heels of the COVID -19 pandemic and 
its afterm ath, the cost of shipping containers has reached historical highs. The cost of shipping of one 
standard 20 -foot container is today nearly five times higher than the average of the last 12 years. As it 
is understandable, such high cost negates the competiti veness of many small developing countries, such 
as Sri Lanka, who are small suppliers.  
 
The reasons are many folds, but t he key reasons are, first, turnaround time for containers, trailers, and 
ships in ports and intermodal transport links is slower than normal, as ports, transport providers and 
shippers have to comply with health regulations and social distancing. Second, supply capacity is not 
growing fast enough to catch up with demand and the ability of ports to adjust is more constrained than 
that of shipping lines.  
 
These factors have worsen congestion in key ports and shipping nodes, increased delays, reduced 
visibility of shipments, increased fees and surcharges, added blank sailings, increased overall shipping 
costs and amplified trade frictions.  
 
As you may know, t he high freight rates have a direct impact on the import price of goods, and to the 
extent that costs are passed on to the consumer, also on the final price in the shop.  
 
Madam chair, no one knows how long will it take freight rates to return to earlier l ow averages? There 
are several medium - and longer -term trends suggesting freight rates will likely remain higher than the 
previous long -term average for several years .  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 190 - 
 
  In view of this, my delegation appreciates your leadership and as proposed by Ambassador of Mongolia, 
we call upon the WTO to help us address this burning issue through an array of mechanism at which the 
WTO rules and initiatives have the ability to make s ignificant contributions.  
 
48. Republic of Moldova  
 
This morning session reminded me about a quote which says that "Bad news should always come 
after lunch , first thing in the morning everything left a bruise. " I must admit that after the sober 
assessments and stateme nts during our morning we all had that feeling of being "bruised ", and left 
to reflect deeper on our way forward towards MC12 and beyond.  
 
Mada m Chair, my country as a developing economy, is among the members who do support and do 
believe that a successful and meaningful MC 12 is still within reach if Members contribute collectively 
to it.  
 
As already mentioned by my colleagues, this is a critic al time for this house, which will show if WTO 
Members are able to deliver the long - awaited outcomes. In this context, we express our concern 
and call upon Members holding divergent views to stand up and focus together on bridging their 
positions towards consensus for a meaningful result on fisheries. The credibility of this organization 
is at stake, and it is each member responsibility to insure its own contribution for the consensus.  
 
Furthermore, Moldova supports the ongoing discussions for the ministe rial preparations, particularly 
those on possible Outcome Document for MC12, WTO response to the pandemic, as well as the 
discussions related to the Joint Initiatives. We note with appreciation chairs and facilitators efforts 
in all ongoing discussions, we  also share the view of many other colleagues that we have to focus 
on priorities, and concrete achievable outcomes, both, in short term and long -term perspective.  
 
In this context, with the purpose of driving the process forward post -MC12, along with othe r 
Members, we are ready to support a work program for which Ministers would provide guidance 
during the upcoming Ministerial. The WTO work program should also go in line with current realities 
of 21st century (or be fit for purpose within the 21st century)  and consider insights /needs mentioned 
in the discussions with private sector (stakeholders) and MSMEs as well.   
 
We also hear many Members and voices outside this organization stressing that WTO must remain 
relevant and functional. Therefore, we would li ke to reiterate the importance of the DS resolution 
and reform included as the main priority in the outcome document with actions planned beyond 
MC12. We consider that the restoring a fully functional two -tiered Dispute Settlement system must 
remain a prio rity for all Members.   
 
Another current priority refers to discussions on WTO response to pandemic. Moldova appreciates 
and supports Amb assador  Walkers ' efforts on the process conducted so far in this sense and we do 
support the inclusion in the draft text relevant elements from the Trade and Health initiative as 
revised.  
 
Speaking about deliverables on Joint Initiatives, it was very encouraging to hear t oday the captured 
progress reported within e -commerce negotiations, as well as the domestic services regulation 
reaching an important milestone. Moldova fully supports and commends the high level of 
engagement and hard work of Members within all JSIs. As many other Members, we believe that 
these Joint Initiatives are an important contribution to this organization, which will lead to important 
deliverables responding to 21st century realities. We also support the very intensive activity and 
discussions withi n the TESSD ( Trade and Environmental Sustainability Structured Discussions) and 
the revised Fossil Fuel Subsidies Reform initiative.  
 
In the negotiations on Agriculture, which is an important priority for my country, we expect that a 
meaningful outcome at  MC12 is less achievable. However, we do support the necessity of adopting 
a balanced work program, which will pave the way forward for the negotiations post MC12. In this 
context let me reiterate that the  Republic of Moldova considers a priority to addres s the existing 
imbalances between the commitments of Members that acceded to the Organization under Article  XII 
and those of the original Members in all 3 pillars of agriculture negotiations, particularly focusing on 
market access and domestic support.  Additionally, our expectations at MC12 would  also include in 
the package the insurance of global food security through a WFP decision, which was within reach 
last December.  WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 191 - 
 
   
On services, Moldova does support the necessity of restarting the negotiations on enhancing market 
access , including sending a political signal and agreeing to start negotiations post MC12 as suggested 
by the chair of the Committee.  
 
Last but not least, Republic of Moldova continues to support the extension of the moratorium on 
electronic transmissions with a view to make it permanent, as well as the moratorium under the 
Article 64.2 on TRIPS non -violation complaints.  
 
Finally , we stand ready to engage constructively with Members in the discussions on preparations 
for MC12 and beyond, as well as we will further support the initiatives aimed to strengthen the 
multilateral trading system.  
 
49. Honduras  
 
Thank you, Director -Gener al and thank you Negotiating Group Chairs and Chair of the General 
Council for your reports and your efforts.  
 
As we have previously stated, the WTO response to the pandemic is a priority for our country, and 
we agree with a number of Members that the subj ect of trade and health must be integral and central 
to the Twelfth Ministerial Conference (MC12), without preventing us from achieving balanced results 
on the topics under negotiation. The consequences of the COVID -19 pandemic have represented 
great chall enges and threats for all the Members of the Organization. As a side effect, our industries 
are now facing the largest percentage increase in input costs and essential raw material costs in 
history.  
 
In addition, we are facing an unprecedented increase in logistics costs for imports and exports, in 
particular global freight costs. This has a direct impact on production and marketing logistics chains 
for goods, which in turn affects the price and supply of products, resulting in lower purchasing power 
for co nsumers and businesses. Our delegation wishes to point out that this situation represents a 
serious threat to global macroeconomic stability, especially impacting all the countries that depend 
on international trade.  
 
We therefore support and agree with th e idea shared by the distinguished Ambassador of Mongolia 
and other Members, which is to convene a special session to address this topic at the WTO, with a 
view to discussing it with all the relevant parties in order to develop and build an appropriate 
regulatory mechanism for resolving similar situations. This mechanism would be included in the final 
document as a potential outcome for MC12.  
 
Finally, we hope that together, we can find the path to achieving effective and much -needed 
outcomes that are in th e interest of all, as well as a successful Ministerial Conference.  
 
50. Cameroon  
 
Madam Chairperson, Cameroon has taken due note of the elements of your report as well as those 
of the various negotiating bodies and welcomes the commitment of these bodies t o a successful 
outcome at MC12.  
 
My delegation reiterates its constructive commitment to work with all delegations towards a 
successful and meaningful outcome of the ongoing negotiations and associates itself with the 
statements made by the African and ACP  Groups.  
 
Congratulations to the interpreters who work hard every day to facilitate our exchanges.  
 
Madam Chairperson, according to the last correspondence sent to you by the Minister of Trade of 
Cameroon, the post COVID -19 economic recovery and the fight against food price inflation should 
mobilize all our energy towards MC12.  
 
With regard to fishing, we remain committed to concluding an agreement and support the sensible 
recommendations outlined in your introductory remarks, which merit proper considerati on. 
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 192 - 
 
  As you have so rightly stressed, the status quo  is not desirable given the overcapacity and 
overfishing observed at sea. This is why we cannot legalize certain States' subsidies that have long 
been called into question by the institutions responsible for fisheries management. At the 15  July 
ministerial meeting, our Minister reiterated Cameroon's readiness and willingness to reach a fair and 
equitable agreement that is consistent with the mandate, and then clearly emphasized the 
Government of Cameroon's  significant reservations as regards this hybrid proposal that neither 
provides for the prohibition of harmful subsidies nor is accompanied by any performance 
requirements.  
 
To date, only a few States, including African and ACP States, have clearly committed to limiting 
subsidies in their waters to below a global marine capture threshold. We will continue to put forward 
proposals to improve the text and remain optimistic as re gards a possible outcome at MC12, if: the 
major subsidizing countries commit to a minimum reduction of their subsidies;  we focus on industrial 
and small -scale fishing and exclude artisanal fishing from the scope of this instrument; we limit the 
application  of Article 5.1.1 to waters under the jurisdiction of States; we strengthen Article 3 to 
ensure that the sanctions against illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing are effective and 
in compliance with international law. On this point, it is essent ial that the competence and primacy 
of the coastal State are recognized; special and differential treatment takes into account the needs 
of developing countries; common but differentiated responsibility and the polluter pays principle are 
integrated.  
 
While the flexibility of the parties is essential for reaching a consensus, it is important to highlight 
that respect for the mandate that we set ourselves is fundamental in order to legitimize the 
negotiations. The success of negotiations lies in these two el ements. In the absence of respect for 
the mandate, a text for protocol needs may be concluded, without meeting the actual needs 
identified to begin with. This is the danger that we face in the fisheries negotiations, the text and 
discussions on which too o ften diverge from the mandate calling for: the prohibition of certain 
subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing; the elimination of subsidies that play a 
role in IUU fishing; and the granting of precise, operational and effective special an d differential 
treatment to developing countries in order to meet their development needs. However, as has been 
repeatedly highlighted by the African Group, the ACP Group and other delegations, Article 5 of the 
current text on overcapacity and overfishing does not prohibit the most harmful subsidies and 
instead legalizes questionable practices under a veneer of sustainability that is not attached to any 
performance requirement.  
 
Turning to agriculture, we have always indicated that this issue is key for our  country. The proposals 
put forward by the African Group, which do not feature in the report submitted for our assessment, 
warrant appropriate consideration. We are of the view that MC12 should set the cap on domestic 
support measures at the de minimis  level. This is the minimum that should be established to pave 
the way towards equity and justice. We support the adoption of a consensus decision on public 
stockholding and consider that it would be wise to approve its permanent use. It must be said that 
these stocks are essential for our economies and merit special attention.  
 
In terms of the Agreement on Trade -Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), 
Cameroon invites all parties to work towards the adoption of a package of measures aimed at 
facilitating access to vaccines and pharmaceutical products. In our view, there is no use speaking in 
favour of universal access to vaccines, while at the same time objecting to the temporary lifting of 
certain rules on the pretext that such a measure would  have a limited impact. Only a combination 
of measures would be effective in tackling the COVID -19 pandemic. As long as there is no panacea 
for vaccine access, we will not bring this pandemic to an end with half measures.  
 
Concerning development, Madam Chairperson, Chairperson of the Council, if there is one subject 
that combines division and often the marginalization of developing countries' expectations, then that 
topic is certainly development. On this matter, the Chairpe rson of the Committee on Trade and 
Development in Special Session has, in vain, been encouraging certain delegations to engage 
constructively. For over 20 years, we have been given a mandate to make the special and differential 
treatment provisions effecti ve, operational and precise. For over 20 years, the G90 has been 
submitting proposals that are given no consideration. For over 20 years, all proposals, including 
those with only a limited scope in procedural terms, have been systematically rejected. We he ar 
very few invitations to recall the importance of development and have high hopes that MC12 will 
place development at the centre of the topics under discussion.  
 WT/GC/M/193  
 
- 193 - 
 
  We are aware that we need to be realistic, pragmatic and determined in order to reach a rea sonable 
consensus on several points by MC12.  
 
Lastly, we would like to be informed in good time of the modalities for participating in MC12 in order 
to facilitate the physical participation of delegates from the capital. Madam Chairperson, Chairperson 
of the General Council, you may rest assured that Cameroon will pursue its constructive commitment 
to ensure the success of our work.  
 
__________