RESTRICTED  
  
WT/GC/M/191  
 
8 July 2021  
(21-5390) Page: 1/80 
General Council  
5-6 May 2021    
 
MINUTES OF MEETING  
HELD IN VIRTUAL FORMAT ON 5 -6 MAY 2021  
Chairperson: H.E. Mr. Dacio Castillo (Honduras)  
The Chairman expressed  the General Council's condolences to the delegation , the Government and 
the People of Chad for the demise of the President of the Republic of Chad, His Excellency Idriss 
Déby. The Chairman  likewise expressed the General Council's sympathy to the delegation, the 
Government and the People of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines for the recent eruption of La 
Soufrière that had caused tremendous devastation on the island.  The Chairman also expressed the 
Council's deepest sentiments and condolences  for the passing of former Deputy Director -General 
Miguel Rodriguez Mendoza.  
 
The Chairman bad e farewell to H.E. Mr. Michael von Ungern -Sternberg  (Germany), H.E. Mr. Kemal 
Madenoğlu  (Turkey), and H.E. Ms. Paik Ji-ah (Republic of Korea)  and expressed appreciation for 
their valuable contribution during their time as Permanent Representatives.  
 
The Ch airman welcomed the incoming Chief of Staff, Dr. Bright Okogu, and thanked the outgoing 
Chief of Staff, Ambassador Tim Yeend, for his service to the organization over the past eight years.  
 
Subjects discussed1: 
 
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 CHAIRMAN  ................................ ................................ .......................  2 
3   WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 
DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT  ......................  6 
4   TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS  ................................ ................................ ...........................  8 
4.1   Status Report on the Considerations by the TRIPS Council on the "Proposal for a Waiver    
from Certain Provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the Prevention, Containment and Treatment    
of COVID -19" – Statement by the Chairman of the Council for TRIPS  ................................ ........  8 
5   TRADE RELATED CHALLENGES OF THE LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES AND WAY 
FORWARD: A DRAFT FOR MC DECISION   ................................ ................................ ........  21 
6   SUPPORTING THE CONCLUSION OF FISHERIES SUBSIDIES NEGOTIATIONS FOR      
THE SUSTAINABILITY OF THE OCEAN AND FISHING COMMUNITIES – DRAFT 
MINISTERIAL DECISION - COMMUNICATION FROM BRAZIL  ................................ ..........  28 
7   WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE AND MORATORIUM ON IMPOSING 
CUSTOMS DUTIES ON ELECT RONIC TRANSMISSIONS – REQUEST FROM INDIA  .............  34 
8   PAPER TITLED "THE LEGAL STATUS OF 'JOINT STATEMENT INITIATIVES' AND     
THEIR NEGOTI ATED OUTCOMES" – REQUEST FROM INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA   ...........  42 
 
1 The proposed agenda was circulated in document WT/GC/W/8 21. WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 2 - 
 
  9   GENERAL COUNCIL DECLARATION, TRADE AND HEALTH: COVID -19 AND BEYOND – 
UPDATE FROM AUSTRALIA; BRAZIL; CANADA; CHILE; CHINA; THE EUROPEAN UNION; 
HONG KONG, CHINA; ICELAND; JAPAN; KENYA; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; MEXICO;   
REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA; MONTENEGRO; NEW ZEALAND; NORTH MACEDONIA;    
NORWAY; SINGAPORE; SWITZERLAND AND THE UNITED KING DOM  ..............................  52 
10   PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR WTO COUNCILS AND COMMITTEES                  
ADDRESSING TRADE CONCERNS – UPDATE FROM CO -SPONSORS  ................................ .. 61 
11   STATEMENT BY COLOMBIA, COSTA RICA, ECUADOR, PANAMA AND PARAGUAY        
ON TRADE RESTRICTIONS THAT BLOCK EQUAL ACCESS TO COVID -19 VACCINES  ..........  64 
12   INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE UNCTAD/WTO – REPORT OF THE                                   
JOINT ADVISORY GROUP ON ITS 54TH SESSION   ................................ ..........................  74 
13   COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION –                                        
REPORT ON MEETING OF MARCH 2021 ................................ ................................ ...........  77 
14   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 78 
14.1   Statement by the Chairman in connection with Administrative Measures for Members in 
arrears  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. 78 
ANNEX 1 – STAT EMENTS BY COLOMBIA ON TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS (AGENDA                       
ITEM 4), ON THE WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE AND MORATORIUM    
ON THE IMPOSING CUSTOMS DUTIES ON ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSIONS – REQUEST 
FROM  INDIA (AGENDA ITEM 7) AND ON THE PAP ER ENTITLED "THE LEGAL STATUS OF 
'JOINT STATEMENT INITIATIVES' AND THEIR NEGOTIATED OUTCOMES" – REQUEST 
FROM  INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA (AGENDA ITEM 8)  ................................ .....................  80 
 
1  REPORT BY THE CHAIR OF THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE AND REPORT BY 
THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL  
1.1.  The Chairman  recalled that a Formal TNC meeting and Informal Heads of Delegation  had been  
convene d by the Director -General  on 3 May . He invite d the Director -General, as Chair of the TNC, 
to briefly report on th at meeting.  
1.2.  The Director -General  reported that the  TNC had held its 40th Formal Session on  3 May  in 
conjunction with an Informal Heads of Delegation meeting. 62 Members had intervened , and they 
had had a good exchange of views about priorities for the months ahead. Her opening statement 
and summing up ha d been circulated as JOB/TNC/91. She had alread y started reaching out to 
Members as promised and hope d they would have concrete progress to take stock of later in May . 
1.3.  The Chairman  said that Members had a rich discussion at the meeting on 3 May , and he would 
also refer Members  to the D irector -General 's concluding remarks, and to his intervention at the end 
of that meeting. He noted that the statements that delegations made on 3 May would be fully 
reflected in the minutes2 of that meeting. He reiterate d that he would continue his consultations on 
MC12 the following week. He would then convene an Informal General Council meeting to report on 
those consultations.  
1.4.  The General Council took note  of the report of the Director -General.  
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI, NAIROBI AND BUENOS AIRE S OUTCOMES – 
STATEMENT BY THE CHAIR MAN  
2.1.  The Chairman  recalled3 that the  item remain ed on the agenda so that the General Council c ould 
continue to follow up, in a horizontal and transparent manner, on the Ministerial decisions adopted 
in Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires.  His report t hat day was based 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. The report w ould focus only on those areas where there ha d been 
 
2 The Minutes of the 40th Formal Session of the Trade Negotiations Committee was circulated in document 
TN/C/M/40.  
3 The Chairman's statement was circulated in document JOB/GC/25 8. WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 3 - 
 
  developments since the March meeting of the General Council, and for those areas he did not 
mention t hat day, he referred Members  to the previous report under th at item.  
2.2.  On the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce and the Moratorium , he recall ed that, in a 
communication dated 1 April, he had  invited all Members to consult on the Work Programme and 
the Moratorium  in preparation for MC12. Eighteen delegations had responded to his invitation, 
including two group coordinators. On 29 April, he had  convened an informal open -ended meeting 
where he had reported on his consultations. His statement ha d been circulated as JOB/GC/257. The 
meeting had also been an occasion to hear the views of those who had not attended the consultations 
and to hear views on possible ways forward ahead of MC12. In th at regard and based on what he 
had heard from the consultations, he had  asked whether Members would consider it useful to hold 
structured discussions including the sharing of national experiences as suggested by some 
delegations.  
2.3.  Despite well -known differences i n Members' positions, delegations had confirmed their 
readiness to engage and deepen the discussions on e -commerce. On the Moratorium, some 
delegations had reiterated the need to have clarity on its scope and revenue implication. Others had 
noted the need to consider the broader benefits of the moratorium. A number of delegations had 
also highlighted the need to broaden the discussions under the Work Programme to address not only 
issues related to the moratorium but also the digital divide and the challenge s limiting developing 
countries' ability to leverage the benefits of digital trade.  
2.4.  As he had  heard no objection to having structured discussions ahead of MC12, he had  concluded 
that he would reflect further on the next steps and reach out to Members as ne cessary.  He noted 
that Members had  had a rich and fruitful discussion at the previous  week's meeting. Given t hat day's 
long agenda, he encourage d delegations not to repeat that discussion. However, if any delegation 
wishe d its statement made on 29 April to  be reflected in the record of th e meeting, they should send 
it to the Secretariat. He also note d that Members  had a separate agenda item on the Work 
Programme and the Moratorium – which was Item 7 of the General Council's agenda.  
2.5.   There were a few matters to report in the area of Agriculture. Concerning the Ministerial 
Decision on Public Stockholding for Food Security Purposes, he recalled that  the first recourse to the 
Decision had been  reported in 2020. Recently , the same Member had notified on 8 April to have 
exceeded the de minimis level for rice for the marketing year of 2019 -2020, and had sought coverage 
of the breach of the de minimis limit under the Interim Solution set out in the Bali Decision, and in 
the subsequent General Council Decision of November 2014. The notification w ould be on the agenda 
of the June meeting of the Committee on Agriculture for review. As regards the follow -up to the Bali 
TRQ Decision, the Committee continue d to deliberate on the outstanding issue of the futu re operation 
of Paragraph 4 of the Underfill Mechanism with a view to finding an agreement within the agreed 
deadline of December 2021. The Chair ha d already started consultations with Members on th e issue.  
2.6.  Regarding the implementation of the Nairobi Decis ion on Export Competition by Members with 
scheduled export subsidies commitments, fourteen Members ha d circulated their revised schedules 
– twelve of which ha d already been certified. One of the two remaining Members ha d recently 
informed the Committee to have completed the domestic process to approve the Nairobi outcome, 
paving the way for the circulation of its draft schedule. The Committee on Agriculture ha d initiated 
the second triennial review of the Nairobi Decision. 2021 was the first year when all M embers were 
expected to reply to the annual Export Competition questionnaire following the expiry of the grace 
period foreseen in the Nairobi Decision.  
2.7.  On the LDC Services Waiver, following an initial proposal from the LDC Group, on 5 March the 
Council for  Trade in Services had agreed to organize a virtual workshop on LDCs' services export 
performance and implementation of the preferences notified under the LDC Services Waiver. The 
event w ould be held during the first week of June.  Regarding Duty -Free Quota -Free market access 
for LDCs, a discussion had taken  place at the last CTD meeting in March. A number of Members had 
provided updates on their DFQF schemes for LDCs, and the LDCs  had once again stressed the 
importance to them of DFQF market access. The Com mittee w ould revert to th at agenda item at its 
next meeting in June.  
2.8.  A brief update concerning Trade Facilitation where the Committee ha d been very active, 
including initiating discussions on the first four -year review of the Trade Facilitation Agreement. The WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 4 - 
 
  rate of ratification remain ed at 93% with 10 Members left to ratify the agreement. Regarding Aid for 
Trade, a stocktaking event had taken  place on 23 to 25 March and he invited  Ambassador Piracha  
(Pakistan ), Chair of the CTD, to report on th e event.  
2.9.  Ambassador Muhammad Mujtaba Piracha (Pakistan), Chairman of the CTD , reported that the 
Aid-for-Trade Stocktaking event held on 23 -25 March 2021 had provided an opportunity to survey 
the on -going economic impacts of the COVID -19 pandemic – impacts t hat were falling particularly 
hard on LDCs and many small, tourism -dependent developing countries. A total of 35 sessions had 
been held. Some 20 of th ose sessions had been  organized by Members or Groups of Members 
including four sessions organized by the L DC Group. More than 200 speakers had participated with 
46% of those being female speakers. Several thousand trade and development professionals had 
attended the three days.  The conference had generated a considerable amount of analysis on how 
Aid for Trade  could contribute to pandemic recovery, response and resilience measures. The 
divergent outlooks of different parts of the world in terms of economic growth, indebtedness and 
access to finance had been  a theme evoked in the high level plenary event where  Dr. Ngozi had 
been joined by the Heads of the IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, WHO and World Bank.  
2.10.   Equitable global COVID -19 vaccine roll -out had also been  identified as the best value global 
economic stimulus package available in that high -level session. There had been  recognition , too, of 
the need to redouble efforts to promote global value chain integration and to address supply side 
capacity constraints if hard -won development gains were not  to be permanently reversed by the 
pandemic.  Keeping markets open had been  described as essential for vaccine delivery and to bring 
forth a strong and sustained recovery. Several sessions had looked at adapting trade formalities to 
take account of the pandemic both at a practical level in terms of using electronic tools to speed 
clearance and also how implementation of the T FA provisions could  help in th at regard.  
2.11.   Regional approaches to COVID -19 recovery had also been discussed, including leveraging the 
African Continental Free Trade Area and PACER Plus agreement in the Pacific. Ther e had also been 
a focus on promoting recovery among MSMEs and in the tourism sector. One bright spot in terms of 
resilience had been  the rapid growth of digital trade , but again , there had been  concern that 
opportunities for recovery had been  limited by the digital divide. Two sessions had taken  a gender -
lens to the impact of COVID -19 on women's participation in trade and trade -related activities and 
many of the sessions had examined the gender dimension of the issues at hand.  
2.12.   Promoting an inclusive and green recovery had also been a theme discussed and one that 
would be taken forward through further work in the ongoing biennial A id for Trade  Work Programme. 
That work w ould culminate next year in  the 2022 Global Review of Aid for Trade that w ould examine 
the theme of "Empowering connected, sustainable trade."  That information, along with a more 
detailed summary report of the Stocktaking event, w ould be made available in due course on the 
WTO websi te at the Aid for Trade section.  
2.13.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , reiterated the importance of implementing 
the decisions in favour of LDCs with regard to accelerating and increasing their integration into world 
trade, with the expected p ositive trickle -down benefits for their people , in terms of employment and 
poverty reduction. The proper operationalization of the decisions taken in favour of LDCs in the past 
was all the more critical in those times of crisis in which their economies had been particularly 
affected and needed to diversify their export potential. The LDC Group thanked the Members that 
had notified their preferences granted to their countries and called those who had not done so to 
follow suit. Beyond notifications, Members should collectively ensure follow up to implementation. It 
was in that spirit that an LDC workshop on the services waiver was co -organi zed with the WTO. The 
workshop would be attended by Members and suppliers from LDCs and external consumers.  
2.14.   The LDC Group also called on Members to further consider its submissions to the Committee 
on Rules of Origin, and to identify best practices and areas requiring reform, so as to align 
themselves with the Nairobi Decision. Moreover, as regards e -commerce, the LDCs supported the 
revival of the 1998 Work Programme and the discussions on their constraints, in order to fully benefit 
from the potential of electronic commerce. The LDCs had a compelling need to move forward 
decisively on that issue taking into account thei r communication submitted in November 2019. 
Regarding the moratorium on imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions, the LDC Group 
supported the preparatory work for deliberation by the Ministers at MC12.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.15.   The representative of the European Union  said that, o n the Nairobi Decision on Export 
Competition, the European Union continue d to urge the remaining Members to submit the necessary 
schedule modifications to eliminate export subsidy commitments as soon as possible and in time for 
MC12. The 2021 Exp ort Competition Questionnaire w ould be the first occasion on which developing 
countries were required to submit replies. The European Union encourage d all developing Members 
to do so. Th at wa s particularly important for those who were active exporters. The  European Union 
also look ed forward to the discussion in the Committee on Agriculture Regular meetings on the 
triennial review of the Nairobi Decision. The European Union count ed on Members ' active 
participation on how to enhance disciplines and ensure no circumvention of commitments.  
2.16.   On the Bali Ministerial Decision on Public Stockholding, the European Union note d that India 
had invoked the Bali Ministerial Decision on Public Stockholding for the second time in its DS:1 
notification submitted on 8 April 20 21. Th at would be examined in the Regular meeting of the 
Committee on Agriculture together with the remaining questions to India from 2020. The European 
Union hope d that it could count on India 's constructive engagement with the Membership during th e 
exami nation and that the information still to be provided would be supplied in time for the 
Committee.  
2.17.   On the Bali Ministerial Decision on Tariff Rate Quota administration, the European Union  
continue d to regret that it had not been possible to reach an agreement on widening the scope of 
the underfill mechanism  in order to ensure that all Members t ook on equivalent commitments under 
the Decision. Rolling over the timeframe in 2021 w ould not be acceptable to the European Union. 
The Eu ropean Union  took note of the recent discussions and constructive ideas put forward by the 
Chair of the regular Committee on Agriculture  and urged the Membership to engage on th e issue 
and work constructively in the Committee on Agriculture Regular meeting s. The European Union  
consider ed that th e issue should be taken up by Ministers at MC12.  
2.18.   The representative of Indonesia  noted that Members still ha d a lot of work to be done to 
ensure meaningful progress in the implementation of the Bali, Nairobi and Buen os Aires outcomes. 
The top priority remain ed a meaningful outcome on the establishment of a permanent solution on 
PSH and a comprehensive and balanced outcome on SSM  at MC12. Indonesia urged Members to  
focus their negotiation s on the core issues in the unf inished agriculture mandate and to restore the 
credibility of th e WTO by making it work  for the resource -poor and livelihood farmers in the world , 
who were currently being beaten by  the pandemic and its impact on food security . 
2.19.   The representative of India said that, w hile Members  were working towards outcomes for 
MC12, India wished to remind  them of the  Ministerial Mandates from Bali and Nairobi regarding an 
effective and permanent outcome on public stockholding for food security  purposes. The Ministerial 
Mandate for  PSH was clear that the negotiations ha d to be on an accelerated and separate track . 
Any effort to link th ose discussions with other pillars in agriculture or any other sector would  
undermin e the Ministerial Mandate. If Members c ould not deliver on the mandated issues of the past 
Ministerial  Conferences, the WTO's  competency would come  under question. That would leave doubt 
as to whether the WTO and its Members would  honour the outcomes at MC12 for which they were 
currently preparing. The credibility of the WTO rested  on its capacity to implement  outcomes of the 
past Ministerial Mandates  especially when food security issues ha d become pronounced due to the 
ongoing pandemic.  
2.20.   On the Bali Ministerial Decision on Public Stockholding for Food Security  Purposes  and the 
General Council Decision of 2014 , as the Chairman had  reported and  as had been  mentioned by the 
European Union , India had notified the Committee on Agriculture that  it had exceeded the de minimis 
level of market price support for the market year 2018 -2019 and 2019 -2020. Th at market price 
support to rice, a traditional food crop, was notified under Article 7.2 (b) of the Agreement o n 
Agriculture to pursue public stockholding programmes for food security p urposes. India 's public 
stockholding programmes covering rice and several other commodities ha d been consistently 
reported in table D as one notification since 1995. The programme was consistent with the criteria 
mentioned in Paragraph 3, Footnote 5, and Footnote 5 &6 of Annex 2 to the Agreement on 
Agriculture. The stocks under the programme were acquired and released to meet the domestic food 
security needs of India 's poor and vulnerable population and not impede commercial trade and food 
security of other Members . For th ose reasons, the notified level of market price support was covered 
by the peace clause set out in the Bali Ministerial Decision and the General Council  Decision 
mentioned in document WT/L/ 939. India ha d been constructively engaging on th at issue with other WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 6 - 
 
  Members in the meetings of the Committee on Agriculture  and did not support  linking PSH outcomes 
with other outcomes.  
2.21.   Since the European Union ha d again raised  the issue , India was  nudged to repeat wha t it had 
said in response to the European Union 's comments . Members  calling for transparency should lead 
by example . It was  not India's  intention to point fingers . But the European Union had still not 
submitted its own notification for the market year 2018 -2019, well passed the deadline of 30 
September 2019 and crossing nineteen  months , which had been the benchmark for it when it had  
submitted its 2017-2018 notifications. It was also disappointing to note that specific trade concerns 
on the European Union 's policies related to MRLs and endocrine disrupters ha d remained on the 
agenda of the Committee for several years altogether.  
2.22.   As a responsible Member of the WTO, India was conscious of its notification obligations having 
consistently compl ied with them incl uding the notification obligations prescribed in document G/AG/2 
on domestic support . Its market access notifications  had also been  up to date . India's  track record 
with meeting its transparency obligations ha d been much better than that of Members pressing for 
enhanced transparency at the WTO.  
2.23.   On clarification s on questions asked, India request ed Members to  submit their due 
notification s so that at least it could also  have the right to ask questions rather than  those  Members 
who ha d submitted their notifications being asked and push ed to give more clarification s. 
2.24.   The General Council took note  of the Chairman's report and of the statements.  
3  WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 
DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT  
3.1.  The Chairman  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 Develop ment reported regularly to the Council on the progress of work in its Dedicated Sessions. 
In Buenos Aires, Ministers had adopted a Decision reaffirming their commitment to the Work 
Programme and instructing the CTD to continue its work in Dedicated Session s under the overall 
responsibility of the General Council. He invited Ambassador Piracha to report on the matter.  
3.2.  Ambassador Muhammad Mujtaba Piracha (Pakistan), Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the 
CTD, reported that there  had been no meeting of the CTD 's Dedicated Session on Small Economies 
since November. He had however  recently met with the Coordinator of the SVE Group who  had 
informed him that, in line with what had been announced at the last General Council meeting in 
March, consultations had been held with Members on the possibility of holding a meeting of the 
Dedicated Session to discuss the impact of natural disasters on the trade of small economies. He 
hoped to be able to circulate the agenda for th at meeting soon. He would also like to mention that 
the Dedicated Session w ould definitely be meeting as Members  prepare d for MC12.  
3.3.  Going by past practice, the Dedicated Session w ould need to approve a report to the General 
Council, which would contain a summary of the work un dertaken since the last Ministerial 
Conference. Th at report, in the past, ha d also contained the elements of an agreed text for a decision 
on the Work Programme on Small Economies, particularly the possible elements of future work. He 
had been given to und erstand that the SVE Group Coordinator w ould soon be consulting with 
Members on th at matter. The objective of the SVE Group would be to eventually table a proposed 
text for a Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on Small Economies in the Dedicated Se ssion, 
for approval by Members. He would  remain in touch with the SVE Group Coordinator as well as with 
other Members in th at regard.  
3.4.  The representative of Guatemala , on behalf of the SVEs , said that, as it had been  announced 
at the last General Council Me eting, the SVEs had  held consultations with some Members and had 
had a good response regarding the Group's  proposal to hold a Dedicated Session of the Work 
Programme on Small Economies on the issue of  "Economic and Trade Impact of Natural Disasters 
on Small Economies ". The Group w ould circulate the proposal shortly for consideration of all 
Members and w ould commence the organization of the session with a view to holding it in June . The 
SVEs thank ed Members for supporting that issue and hope d to report back to the General Council of 
the results of the session. The Group announce d that it w ould be working on a draft proposal for a WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 7 - 
 
  Ministerial Decision of the Work Programme on Small Economies as a deliverable for MC12. The draft 
proposal w ould be presented for the consideration of the CTD Dedicated Session of Small Economies. 
The SVEs highlight ed the importance of the work carried out within the Work Programme and hope d 
to count on the general support of the Membership and the Ministers to conti nue its focused 
discussions on the needs and challenges of small economies.  
3.5.  The representative of Saint Lucia , on behalf of CARICOM , associated with  the statement of the 
SVEs. The CARICOM Group renew ed its support for the convening of the dedicated discuss ion on 
trade and natural disasters within the context of the SVE s and on the level of the Committee on 
Trade and Development Dedicated Session on Small Economies. CARICOM was  pleased that 
Members ha d responded positively to the SVE Group's proposal in th at regard and look ed forward 
to the discussion tentatively scheduled in June. Since the previous  General Council meeting, one of 
the CARICOM Member States, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines , had become the most recent case 
study among the SVEs Group of its acute vulnerability to natural disasters. On 9 April , the volcano 
on the island of Saint Vincent had erupted explosively displacing over twenty  thousand residents 
from their homes and decimating import ant sectors such as agriculture, tourism and fishing. In the 
space of two weeks , there had been  over thirty  explosive events covering the entire island in volcanic 
ash. Nearby islands such as Barbados had also been impacted  – again, a reflection of CARICOM 's 
shared vulnerability. The explosive eruption had been  followed by five  floods that had  caused 
devastation to the island in a very short period of time. In less than two weeks , it had been estimated 
that the volcano ha d caused over  USD 150 million in inf rastructure damage . In addition , USD  150 
million  of damage ha d been attributed to the agriculture sector , where  90% of tree crops and 100 % 
of vegetable crops ha d been destroyed.  Saint Vincent and the Grenadines  had already  been suffering 
acute economic pain as a result of the COVID -19 pandemic and the eruption had taken place at the 
same time. That was a clear example that the economic vulnerability of the trade and economic 
prospects of SVEs to natural disasters was not simply an academic or theoretical matter . It was an 
almost daily  experience for many SVEs.  
3.6.  In less than a month, CARICOM countries w ould have to endure another Atlantic hurricane 
season . Based on experience, hurricanes  were becoming more destructive  each year , inflicting more 
physical and economic damage  in the process  which c ould set them back decades. It was the 
devastation caused by two Category 5 hurricanes, Irma and Maria, that had swept through the 
Caribbean region in the space of two weeks in September 2017 , that had prompted  CTD Dedicated 
Discussion  to initiate discussions on trade and natural disasters. The destruction of property and 
infrastructure and the loss of lives recorded, particularly on the islands of Bermuda and Dominica, 
had highlighted the cat astrophic impact that the hurricanes had carried on small islands in 
developing seas. It was again in that backdrop that CARICOM  was prepared to engage with Members 
on those important issues with the view to raising awareness of the impacts of th ose natural hazards 
on their trade. CARICOM  also remain ed open to discuss with Members the appropriate trade policy 
responses that c ould be deployed in th at context. The WTO  should  be actively engaged in th at matter 
and urgently address the acute trade poli cy responses that c ould be deployed in th at context. As a 
deliverable for MC12 , CARICOM  called on M embers to support the Ministerial Decision on the Work 
Programme on Small Economies. Such an outcome  was of utmost importance for CARICOM. The 
CARICOM Group  acknowledg ed the solidarity that the General Council had expressed  in recognition 
of the devastation brought about by the explosive eruption of the volcano in Saint Vincent and the 
Grenadines,  which would be shared with its Government.  
3.7.  The representative o f Barbados  associate d with the statements of the SVEs and CARICO M. Year 
after year, graphic reports of the deluge caused by natural disasters on small and vulnerable WTO 
Members inundated them. Barbados  spoke about loss of life and damage to infrastructure  and homes 
and appeal ed to all to support  the response and recovery efforts.  
3.8.  Another critical issue that WTO work needed to address wa s the impact that th ose disasters 
had on trade and trade prospects in th ose countries. Unfortunately, Members  were again reminded 
of those horrific scenes and the irreparable damage of such events. The early projections of the 
molten sulphur  volcano in Saint Vincent and the Grenadines ha d revealed that costs could be up to 
15% of that Caribbean island 's GDP and an estimated 300 million in infrastructural, agriculture and 
housing damage. The damage in terms of trade ha d not yet been revealed , but evidence showed  
wide scale destruction of agricultural products which would have oth erwise contributed to exports , 
the destruction of fishing vessels ; and the indefinite closure of the airport, a vital avenue of exports, 
imports and tourism  – the countr y's main income generator and therefore employment. Barbados  
was heartened, or cautious ly so, to hear the responses to the proposal to convene a dedicated WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 8 - 
 
  session of the Work Programme on Small Economies on the economic and trade impacts of natural 
disasters on th ose countries.  
3.9.  Barbados  looked forward to work with  Members in defining the Pro gramme on that session 
which w ould be held in June. It was time for Members  to examine the role the WTO c ould play in 
examining the nexus between trade and natural disasters and how it c ould assist small economies 
in that regard. Barbados hoped that Members  would be  able to build on that body of work which ha d 
started in the WTO and other international organizations. It should  not all be for nothing. The 
decision on the Work Programme on Small Economies ha d become an important fixture of the 
outcome o f WTO Ministerial Conferences. Barbados  therefore look ed forward to the commencement  
of discussions on the path of a draft decision to be adopt ed by Ministers at MC12.  
3.10.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the Pacific Group , associated  with the  statement 
of the SVEs. The challenges faced by SVEs were enormous . Members of the Pacific Group  had very 
small open economies , dependen t on a few exports , and highly susceptible to external economic 
shocks and high trade costs , owing to their remoteness, smalln ess and geographical fragmentation. 
Those threshold characteristics were exacerbated by climate change and natural disasters. Natural 
disasters were growing in frequency and intensity and ha d often wiped away a significant portion of 
their econom ies. The e conomic impact of COVID -19 ha d further made it worse . Economic sectors 
such as the tourism industry , had collapsed  and exports had declined. The Pacific Group support ed 
the convening of the dedicated session in June to focus on the economic and trade impacts of natural 
disasters on small economies. Th at would enable the CTD to build on the work already established 
on th at topic in 2018 and 2019 , based on studies undertak en by the WTO and funded by the 
Australian Government. The Group also support ed a draft decision for MC12 , that w ould be prepared 
by SVEs. The Pacific Group underline d the importance of th e Work Programme , which aim ed to frame 
responses to trade -related is sues identified for the fuller integration of the smaller vulnerable 
economies into the multilateral trad ing system  and urged Members to engage constructively to 
facilitate meaningful responses to integrat e SVEs into the multilateral trading system.  
3.11.   The re presentative of Fiji associated with the  statement s of the SVE s and the Pacific Group. 
Fiji commend ed Guatemala for its continued efforts in the ongoing consultations with the 
Membership which had been progressing positive ly, and thank ed Members for their understanding 
of the exceptional challenges faced by the SVE s Group. Fiji welcome d the proposal to hold a 
Dedicated Session of the Work Programme on Small Economies on the issue of "Economic and Trade 
Impact of Natural Disasters on Small Economies ". The issue of natural disasters on small economies 
was well known and Fiji could not stress enough that reality. The challenges natural disasters posed 
in view of the varying climatic nature , was very worrying and was a real threat to small economies 
like Fiji, as well as  many Pacific Island countries and similar to the Caribbean Group of countries. 
That had further been bolstered by the devastation posed by the C OVID -19 pandemic. Fiji therefore 
looked forward to the Membership 's engagement on that  important  cause, to assist small economies 
and give due consideration to their plight by supporting the draft proposal to be tabled soon in the 
CTD for an outcome at MC12.  
3.12.   The General Council took note  of the report of the Chairman of the CTD and of the statements.  
4  TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS  
4.1  Status Report on the Considerations by the TRIPS Council on the "Proposal for a 
Waiver from Certain Provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the Prevention, Containment 
and Treatment of COVID -19" (IP/C/W/669) – Statement by the Chair man of the Council 
for TRIPS  
4.1.  The Chairman  recalled that the  item relate d to a status report by the TRIPS Council Chair on 
the "Proposal for a Waiver from Certain Provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the Prevention, 
Containment and Treatment of COVID -19" in d ocument IP/C/W/669 and its addenda. Since the 
March meeting, he underst ood that the Council for TRIPS  had considered th e request again at its 
informal and formal meetings in March and April and he invite d Ambassador Sørli (Norway) to 
provide a status repor t on the TRIPS Council's consideration of th e matter.  
4.2.  Ambassador Dagfinn Sørli (Norway), Chair man of the TRIPS Council , reported that, a t the 
meeting of the TRIPS Council on 15 -16 October 2020, India and South Africa had introduced WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 9 - 
 
  document IP/C/W/669, req uesting a waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the 
prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19, which had been circulated on 2 October 2020 
and ha d since been co -sponsored by the delegations of Kenya, Eswatini, Mozambique, Pakist an, the 
Plurinational State of Bolivia, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Mongolia, Zimbabwe, Egypt, the 
African Group, the LDC Group, the Maldives, Fiji and Namibia. The Council had continued its 
discussions under that agenda item at informal meetings  on 20 November and 3 December, as well 
as at its resumed meeting on 10 December. Following the status report to the General Council on 
16-17 December, the Council had continued its consideration of the waiver request at informal 
meetings on 19 January and  4 February, and at its formal meeting on 23 February. Following the 
status report to the General Council on 3 -4 March, the Council had continued its consideration of the 
waiver request at its formal meeting on 10 -11 March, at an informal meeting on 22 Apr il and at its 
formal meeting on 30 April.  
4.3.  At those meetings, delegations had highlighted the common goal of providing timely and secure 
access to high -quality, safe, efficacious and affordable vaccines and medicines for all. Delegations 
had exchanged views , had asked questions, had sought clarifications and had 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 but could not reach consensus, incl uding on 
whether it was appropriate to move to text -based negotiations. In April 2021, the co -sponsors had 
indicated that they had been  considering an update of their proposal and had been  in the process of 
consulting with Members. Delegations had indicate d a need for further discussions on the waiver 
request and views exchanged by delegations.  That mean t that the TRIPS Council ha d not yet 
completed its consideration of the waiver request. The TRIPS Council w ould therefore continue its 
consideration of the waiver request and report back to the General Council as stipulated in 
Article  IX:3 of the Marrakesh Agreement.  
4.4.  The Chairman  thanked Ambassador Sørli for his report on the discussions in the TRIPS Council . 
As had just been mentioned , the TRIPS Council w ould continue to work on th at matter.  
4.5.  The representative of Mauritius , on behalf of the African Group , reiterated that there was no  
more pressing priority than public health, and called on Members to give the highest attention 
possible to the issue of access to vaccines and therapeutics. Populations were at the mercy of viral 
infections . The international trading system had been  disrupted; and, more importantly, lives had 
been lost and new variants  were breeding . In such challenging times, there was no other solution 
than making access to affordable medicines, including vaccines, easier for developing countries. The 
African Group under lined the need to upscale and diversify global production, aware of the 
production capacity in developing countries and the need of technology transfer, which required 
flexibility in the TRIPS rules to deal with the pandemic. The African Group reiterated i ts full support 
to the waiver and looked forward to an early conclusion of discussions to move to text -based 
negotiations at the earliest.  
4.6.  The representative of South Africa  associated with the statement of the African Group and the 
ACP Group. Over 150 mil lion people across the globe had been infected by COVID -19 and over 
3 million people had succumbed to the virus. The urgency of the request was underscored by the 
escalating death rate due to COVID -19. A first -hand humanitarian crisis was unfolding in vari ous 
parts of the world with rampant mutations, causing much pain and devastation. Lives lost due to 
COVID -19 could not be accepted on the basis that access to life -saving medical products and 
technology was hindered by inequitable access and distribution.  Global solidarity and cooperation 
were required more than ever. The overwhelming support for the waiver from Parliamentarians from 
all corners, Chief Security Officers, former Heads of State , Nobel Laureates and the general public, 
had come as a realizatio n that while the contribution of intellectual property rights to research and 
innovation was appreciated, COVID -19 met the criteria provided for in Article IX of the Marrakesh 
Agreement which provides that "[i]n exceptional circumstances, the Ministerial C onference may 
decide to waive an obligation imposed on a Member by this Agreement or any of the Multilateral 
Trade Agreements",  of which the TRIPS Agreement was a part of. The African Group added that 
COVID -19 was not only an exceptional circumstance, and truly unprecedented.  
4.7.  At the current pace of production, more than 100 countries would not reach reasonable levels 
of vaccination for years. Such inequality of access to vaccination put the whole world at risk, by 
enabling the continuation of the pandemic and the emergence of new variants. In addition to 
thousands of daily deaths, the economic losses from delays in vaccination were estimated at 
USD 9.2 trillion globally. New strains of COVID -19 proved that the virus would not be defeated until WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 10 - 
 
  it was defeat ed everywhere. The most feasible and practical way to ensure enough supplies of 
vaccines in the shortest possible time would be to utilize the unused spare capacity in the developing 
world in order to ramp -up production. Attempts should be made to engage a nd allow all possible 
producers across the world to scale -up production. A deal -by-deal approach in the face of a global 
health emergency had proven inadequate and had instead marginali zed poor countries. Lives would 
only be saved by truly global and inclu sive solutions, and the proposed waiver was the only possible 
tool to address universal, equitable and timely access to life -saving medical products, including 
vaccines, diagnostics and therapeutics. It was the only means through which Members could arrest  
the C OVID -19 pandemic, save lives and begin to address economic reconstruction and resilience.  
4.8.  The African Union called for a limited and temporary waiver that would provide countries with 
the policy space necessary to collaborate in manufacturing, scalin g up and supplying COVID -19 
medical products which were in short -supply. Recourse to waivers under such circumstances was 
provided for in the WTO legal framework and formed part of its legal toolbox.  Co-sponsors were 
revising the proposal to clarify the scope for the waiver, based on products and technologies 
necessary for the containment, treatment and prevention of COVID -19. They were also planning, as 
part of the revised text, to make a proposal on the duration of the waiver based on the projected 
timeframe it would take to reach global immunity given the level of production.  Consultations had 
been held with Members, to facilitate discussions, and they would further call on the Chair of the 
TRIPS Co uncil to facilitate discussions of the revised text.  The African Union urgently called for text -
based negotiations to develop a WTO solution that would temporarily lift the barriers to specific 
intellectual property rights that inhibited an effective respo nse to COVID -19. The African Union 
added that the WTO should primarily respond to the crisis, as well as prepare for future pandemics, 
and have ready -to-trigger rules that would provide automatic rights of use to address the need for 
special arrangements a nd waivers.  
4.9.  The representative of Indonesia  looked forward to text -based negotiations to ramp -up the 
production of vaccines, diagnostics and other medical products for COVID -19, across countries. As 
long as the equitable access to vaccines was not resolved, the virus would continue to mutate and 
affect recovery efforts. The proposal had to be seen from a solidarity point of view, leveraging WTO 
tools to help humanity. Intellectual property had, by its nature, a monopolistic approach which did 
not help address a pandemic or a disease. In this regard,  Indonesia urged Members to ensure that 
all necessary actions would be taken at the WTO to address the issue of intellectual property barriers 
to access vaccines and critical medical products.  
4.10.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the Pacific Group , associated with the statement 
of the ACP  Group . COVID -19 had affected all countries, many of which were experiencing a second 
or third wave. Many small, developing economies were import dependent, as they did not have the 
capacity to manufacture vaccines, medical supplies and equipment , to contain and treat the virus. 
At the TRIPS Council meeting, Members had recognized that there was a critical shortage of vaccines 
worldwide. The TRIPS waiver would therefore enable a scale -up in vaccine production and 
distribution, to ensure that all countries were supplied at the same time. While they understood that 
intellectual property rights granted legal certainty to support innovation, there was also a need to 
ensure that intellectual property rights did not become a  barrier to equitable access to vaccines, 
medical supplies and equipment at affordable prices. The longer the debate, the longer the pandemic 
would extend, as new waves would occur and new strains would emerge; more lives would be lost 
and the longer it wo uld take to start to rebuild economies. The Pacific Group therefore encouraged 
Members to engage constructively on the proposal, to find a balanced way forward to secure 
intellectual property rights and ensure an equitable access to supplies to combat the pandemic.  
4.11.   The representative of Saint Lucia , on behalf of CARICOM , associated with the statement of 
the ACP  Group . CARICOM maintained its concern about the current state of global vaccine inequity 
and reiterated that no country was truly protected until al l countries were equally protected. As of 
2 May 2021, over 275.9 million people around the world had been fully vaccinated, 38% of whom 
were from one country , which underscored the inequity in global vaccination efforts. The CARICOM 
Group thanked the WTO D irector General for convening the Global COVID -19 Vaccine Supply Chain 
Manufacturing Summit on 9 March . It had been a timely discussion which they hoped would lead 
further in the direction of unblocking the challenges in vaccine supply chain manufacturing and 
distribution. Production capacity needed to be expanded, particularly in developing and least 
developed countries, and in emerging markets; and vaccine distribution needed to be more effective 
and more equitable. The CARICOM region did not manufacture COVID -19 vaccines and was therefore 
totally reliant on external manufacturers. They therefore called Members to consider all possible WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 11 - 
 
  solutions to address the problem around global vaccine supply, including the ongoing discussion on 
the TRIPS waiver. CARIC OM reminded Members that there was a moral imperative to ensure that 
all countries had equitable access to vaccines, and should therefore deploy all available trade policy 
tools to improve vaccine supply and access.  
4.12.   The representative of Barbados  associate d with the statement of CARICOM and the ACP  
Group . The global situation on COVID -19 had reached epic proportions as the number of positive 
cases and deaths due to COVID -19 surpassed alarming records. Access to vaccines and other 
lifesaving medical supplies  was neither even nor equitable across the many countries of the world. 
More had to be done to address this  effectively. Barbados looked forward to an updated proposal 
and urged Members to engage in text -based discussions, to reach consensus on an outcome which 
incorporated the interests of all Members.  
4.13.   The representative of Paraguay  said that they were studying the waiver and repeated their 
call to deal with the inequities caused by the COVID -19 pandemic. Paraguay was considering all 
options which took intellectual property and import restrictions into account  and looked forward to 
the re vised version of the waiver. Paraguay thanked the United Arab Emirates, Russia and India for 
their supplies of vaccines. Regarding COVAX, Paraguay believed its financing would only be 
necessary if they had access to those vaccines and if they were distribu ted fairly. Paraguay had 
received over four million doses, enough to vaccinate their adult population, but only some people 
had received the vaccines. Intellectual property rights had to be considered as a whole, and their 
link to health should be seen as a fundamental right , and a ccess to vaccines as a public health good . 
Multilateralism had to come up with solutions to ensure social justice regarding access to vaccines 
and essential medicines.  
4.14.   The representative of Tunisia  had expected a reassuring messag e from the WTO, placing the 
protection of global health ahead of the commercial interests of big pharmaceutical companies. While 
some developed countries had begun to see the end of the tunnel of the health crisis and were 
looking at their economic resilie nce, mainly due to the resumption of an almost normal activity due 
to sustained vaccination rates, LDCs and some developing countries had been sinking deeper into 
the health and economic crises because they had privileged the health of their population. 
Unfortunately, their only means to do so had been  strict lockdown measures, which had exhausted 
their limited resources , so that they were no longer able to effectively address the pandemic, and 
were suffering the ravages of recurring waves of COVID -19. Tuni sia associated itself with the 
statement made on behalf of the African Group and reiterated its strong support for the waiver, 
aimed at providing equitable and affordable access to vaccines and medical products necessary for 
the fight against COVID -19. The y remained hopeful that global solidarity, defended by Tunisia in all 
international fora, would ultimately prevail among Members.  
4.15.   The representative of Malaysia  underscored the importance of having  access affordable 
diagnostic, vaccines and other medical p roducts to effectively contain the spread of COVID -19. At 
this critical juncture, global cooperation and coordination were more than ever of utmost importance 
to expand supply to meet  global needs, as well as the need to act expeditiously on this tough 
question. Malaysia also thanked the Director General for her leadership on this. With th at context in 
mind, they welcomed the discussion on the waiver proposal. They also thanked the co -sponsors for 
initiating th e conversation of great importance during th at critical juncture. In view of the pressing 
global needs to prevent and treat COVID -19, they stressed the importance of undertaking all 
measures necessary to expand and diversify the supply of essential medicines, enhancing the 
affordability of such medicin es, and looked forward to advancing meaningful discussions.  
4.16.   The representative of Nigeria  made reference to his delegation's  previous statement and 
underscored the urgency to move to constructive text -based negotiations on the proposal, to reach 
a balanced  outcome. The devastating negative impact of COVID -19 on lives and livelihoods globally 
could not be overemphasized. The severity of the precarious situation had been  exacerbated by the 
huge and ever -increasing therapeutics and vaccines' supply -demand gap,  largely experienced in the 
developing world. The solution lied in rapid access by every country to affordable diagnostics, 
therapeutics and vaccines to combat COVID -19. Given the race against time to save lives, th at could 
only be achieved by ramping -up the production of those products in developing countries. Members 
had a shared responsibility to work together to ensure that intellectual property rights did not create 
barriers to scale -up research, development, manufacturing and supply of medical product s, essential 
to combat COVID -19. Th at was why they had co -sponsored the proposal and had been  encouraged 
by the significant number of co -sponsors with many Members, external groups and personalities WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 12 - 
 
  voicing their support for the proposal. Constructive text -based negotiations in the TRIPS Council 
would enable balanced outcomes and the subsequent adoption of the waiver.  
4.17.   The representative of Cameroon  associated with the statements of the ACP Group and of the 
African Group. The WTO had to live up to the health  and economic emergency faced by humanity. 
No other interest could prevail over the distress of people and nations, confronted with the harshness 
of the pandemic, at a health, economic and social level. Exceptional circumstances called for 
exceptional meas ures. It was important to focus discussions on the substance of the proposal 
submitted by India, South Africa and endorsed by several Members including the African Group; to 
formulate relevant observations that would facilitate access to vaccines and pharm aceuticals 
products, while avoiding a misuse of the adopted measures. Lifting th ose TRIPS rules could be 
complemented by other measures related to export restrictions and other goods. However, it did not 
seem wise to reduce th ose discussions to whether or not production capacities exist – they could 
also be reconfigured and enlarged, as needed and as had been observed. By refusing to commit to 
text-based negotiations, discussions on production capacity would be seen as a delaying tactic.  
4.18.   The representative of Nepal  associated with the statement of the  LDC Group. Nepal reiterated 
its full support to th e proposal, to save millions of lives across the globe. The COVID -19 pandemic 
had been posing further challenges through its different waves and variants. It had been  worrisome 
to note that across the world, every day more than ten thousand people were dying and above six 
hundred thousand people were infected by the virus. Developing countries, including landlocked 
developing countries, had been severely impacted  by the pandemic. Nepal urged all Members to 
consider the waiver proposal positively.  
4.19.   The representative of Afghanistan  associated with the statement of the LDC Group . The 
pandemic had continued to affect society and the economy worldwide, it was a mass human 
catastrophe. The pandemic's effect on the health sectors, especially that of LDCs, was horrific. 
Governments could not provide affordable equipment, treatment and vaccines for their  citizens. The 
situation in Afghanistan had been deteriorating, with a third wave in the horizon. According to the 
World Health Organization, the eastern region of Afghanistan had experienced a particularly sharp 
increase of COVID -19 cases and hospitalizat ions. Aside from the impact of the virus, the pandemic 
had continued to hit communities that had not yet recovered from the first and second waves.  
4.20.   Afghanistan had received the first batch of COVID -19 vaccines, half of them from COVAX and 
the other half f rom India. Afghanistan thanked the international community and India for their 
valuable aid and cooperation. However, they expressed their deep concern regarding the problematic 
situation - only 0.62% of their population had received the first dose of the vaccine. Afghanistan 
recalled the importance of solidarity to ensure that intellectual property rights did not create barriers 
to developing, manufacturing and supplying affordable and timely critical medical products, essential 
to overcome the challenges posed by COVID -19. Therefore, they urged all Members to consider the 
severity of the crisis, adopt a solution -finding approach and move to text -based negotiations. It was 
the proper time to put in place practical measures to ensure the availability of affo rdable and timely 
vaccines and the required medical products to combat the pandemic.  
4.21.   The representative of the United Kingdom  highlighted the importance of the issue, all the 
more so when so many countries around the world found themselves still in the fu ll front of t he 
pandemic. It was essential to work together as an international community to find effective ways to 
ensure equitable, affordable and timely access to COVID -19 related technologies and supplies. As 
said all too often, no one was safe until e veryone was safe. Since the last General Council meeting, 
new ground had been broken in the fight against the pandemic, especially in approving and 
distributing vaccines to those most in need. The United Kingdom was proud to be at the forefront of 
those ef forts to protect people across the globe from the virus. The United Kingdom was a founding 
donor to the ACT Accelerator, and had made one of the largest commitments to the COVAX advanced 
market commitment for low and middle -income countries, with commitmen ts to those ACT -A 
partners of over USD 1 billion. An unprecedented global response to th e threat should allow COVAX 
to supply over 2 billion COVID -19 vaccine doses to all participants in the course of the year.  
4.22.   The United Kingdom was proud that a UK vaccin e, developed at Oxford University and 
produced by Astra Zeneca, was at the heart of the response. Astra Zeneca had entered into more 
than a dozen collaborations in countries around the globe, for example in China, Mexico, Brazil, the 
Russian Federation, th e Republic of Korea and India; to deliver billions of doses to people around 
the world. Now was the time to ramp -up global manufacturing. It was vital to keep trade flowing to WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 13 - 
 
  ensure that issues such as skills' and raw materials' shortages did not hold it back. The United 
Kingdom had been working to ensure that industry and research institutes had the resources they 
needed to identify and scale -up production of safe vaccines as quickly as possible, while taking on 
significant risks and investment themselves . 
4.23.   A balanced and effective intellectual property regime had proved invaluable in the crisis, as 
in others, in supporting innovation and supporting collaboration, as well as ensuring that the results 
of that innovation, including safe and effective diagnost ics, vaccines and therapeutics could reach 
those who needed them. The United Kingdom stood ready to engage in further evidence -based 
discussions and was committed to finding solutions to those issues. Meanwhile, they were delighted 
to see the WTO bringing together key stakeholders to look carefully at all the relevant trade, health 
and intellectual property elements so that the development, production, and equitable access to 
those vaccines could be supported. The United Kingdom remained committed to work i n the fight 
against COVID -19; and had hosted a meeting of G7 Foreign and Development Ministers in London, 
to look into this issue, among others.  
4.24.   Governments could not do this on their own. Industry, manufacturers, and innovators, had 
to look carefully at h ow they could do more as well, including more partnerships that used voluntary 
licensing to ensure access to innovations, whether in vaccines, therapeutics or diagnostics for those 
who needed them. The United Kingdom was also committed to working with all parts of the 
innovation and the production chain, to ensure that they had the right tools. This would require 
industry, developers and manufacturers alike, to collaborate in making available the information 
needed to engage in effective partnerships. This would also require delivering assistance to partners 
to allow them to deliver sufficient quality, for example through model agreements or trade 
agreements. The international community in turn needed to focus its effort on providing appropriate 
guidance rat her than engaging in polari zed discussions.  
4.25.   The United Kingdom welcomed the positive steps that had been made towards vaccine equity, 
including on the collaborations that were needed to deliver unprecedented numbers of innovative 
health products to those m ost in need. Their vital work was far from over, and as a country the 
United Kingdom would continue to play its part in driving the work forward towards a successful 
conclusion.  
4.26.   The representative of Jamaica , on behalf of the ACP Group , commended the waive r's 
cosponsors for bringing to the fore the importance of access to vaccines and other items for the 
prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19. The ACP Group had been  encouraged by the 
robust discussions and exchanges on the proposal; and called fo r the continuation of discussions 
with the same vigour, in different formats, so as to find an outcome as soon as possible in the 
interest of humanity. The proposal should continue to be prioritized in the Work Programme of the 
TRIPS Council. The ACP Group  continued to endorse the genuine public health objectives of the 
proposal and would support proponents in their bid to contribute to international initiatives, to ensure 
that their people had affordable access to medicines, vaccines and other items requir ed to prevent, 
treat and contain the virus.  
4.27.   Vaccination was the only durable solution to contain the virus and, therefore, facilitating 
access, especially by developing countries and LDCs, should be the priority. Fiscal targets had been 
dislocated due to t he impact of the pandemic, and health care and economies faced unprecedented 
challenges. No Member was safe until all Members were  safe, and COVID -19 induced economic and 
social challenges in one Member affected the other s. The ACP Group invited other Memb ers to 
engage constructively and in a collaborative manner with a view to finding a landing zone. The health 
and lives of people should always be the priority. The ACP Group was confident that Members were 
capable of delivering for and on behalf of their p eople in such difficult times.  
4.28.   The representative of Bangladesh  associated with the statement of the LDC Group. Suffering 
and death of people was being witnessed, particularly in developing countries, due to the lack of 
medical support and vaccines which c ould have greatly helped control the spread of COVID -19, as 
successfully done in some developed countries. Nobody was safe if everyone was not safe. Members 
should rise above narrow national interests and use the tools at hand to save the world from the 
public health disaster. The priority should be to ensure unconditional, affordable, equitable and 
timely access to vaccines, medical equipment and other measures to stop the pandemic. The TRIPS 
Agreement or any other regulatory framework should not stand in the way of the transfer of technical 
know -how to fight the virus. Exploiting the situation for profits during the most severe health crisis WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 14 - 
 
  of the humanity in modern history should be refrained from. The LDC Group, including Bangladesh, 
was pleased to co -sponsor the proposal; and urged for a text -based discussion. Time was not on 
their side. Efforts should be redoubled to make quick progress so that an agreement was possible 
before it was too late.  
4.29.   The representative of Pakistan  recalled their previous stat ements in the General Council and 
the TRIPS Council at formal and informal meetings. Every day that an affirmative decision on the 
waiver was delayed, several thousand people across the world died due to COVID -19. While supply 
constraints of vaccines becam e more acute, new variants of the virus were making the disease more 
virulent. The world outside the WTO in every sphere of life, and at every tier, from country leaders 
to civil society, was calling aloud for the removal of IP protection from those vaccin es and for an 
open sharing of vaccine technology. It was unfortunate that not only was there still a struggle to 
understand the gravity of the situation, but  there were  also regressive steps, such as vaccine 
hoarding by countries that had pre -purchased mil lions of doses, and monopolistic profiteering by 
large companies at the cost of human lives. One of the vaccine originator companies had reaped 
millions of US dollars in profits from its sale of vaccines, and had been lobbying towards not 
supporting waivin g IP rights. The world had many divides, an income divide, a technological divide, 
a digital divide, and several others; and people on the wrong side of the divide suffered The vaccine -
divide, however, was different, since the disease did not discriminate between the rich and the poor. 
The vaccinated might feel secure for a few weeks but they would not remain safe until the others 
were also safe. Closing borders to keep people out would cause problems at another level.  
4.30.   Waiver proponents had shown how vaccin e supply could be enhanced by utilising all the 
available capacity across the world; how compulsory licenses were limited and impossible to 
implement; and how voluntary licenses were hard to come by. They had questioned how companies 
could be otherwise for ced to make effective, open, and transparent partnerships to ensure large -
scale production of vaccines.  A market solution to the pandemic was not working nor was it workable 
given the time constraint. There was no existing mechanism at a global multilater al level that could 
effectively deal holistically with a pandemic. The WHO came close, but its mechanisms were not 
sufficient. The TRIPS Agreement provided a lever in form of a waiver, and that was perhaps why so 
many around the world had supported to it. Pakistan had been working bilaterally with delegations 
to revise the proposal and would lay it afresh for the Membership, so that collective work on the new 
text would be possible. After all, if there was such drive to save the fish in the oceans, and some  
profits of private enterprises, people wouldn't be left to die on the streets while waiting for the 
pandemic to burn itself out. A pandemic, like large fires, could not be put out by dousing out the 
flames only on one side.  
4.31.   The representative of the Maldives noted the growing number of the proposal's co -sponsors, 
which demonstrated its importance. It was critical to remove impediments to capacity utilization in 
order to speed -up vaccine manufacturing and enhance vaccine equity. In the United Nations, the 
Secretary General had launched the global campaign "Only Together" in March 2021, which 
underscored the need for global solidarity to ensure fair and equitable access to COVID -19 vaccines 
worldwide. Maldives believed that the waiver was an effective and pra gmatic way for WTO Members 
to meaningfully contribute to the global initiative. They therefore urged Members to recognize the 
unprecedented and exceptional nature of the circumstances, to move towards text-based  
negotiations and reach consensus on the waiv er to increase production to ensure fair, equitable and 
affordable access to COVID -19 products in a timely manner. It was the time to show global solidarity 
to end the pandemic.  
4.32.   The representative of Tanzania  associated with the statement s of the African G roup and of 
the ACP Group . Tanzania  reiterated its long-standing support to the proposed waiver, which would 
enhance global production of COVID -19 vaccines and related medical products. Members were 
grappling with preventive measures to contain the virus, but it was still difficult. Herd immunity 
would only be possible through extensive global vaccination, but the centrali zed manufacturing and 
supply were limiting the possibility to meet the huge demand in a short period. The TRIPS 
Agreement's flexibilities could not deliver the immediate scaled -production and technology -transfer 
needed to respond to the demand of COVID -19 vaccines. Therefore, the adoption of a temporary 
waiver was the only meaningful solution to stand against the COVID -19 chall enge. The proposed 
waiver had gained tremendous traction across the globe from members of parliaments, eminent 
people, scientists, trade unions, civil societies, and the public in general. Only few Members were 
opposing this important initiative. Tanzania urged them to allow the WTO to make an important and 
expected contribution towards stopping COVID -19 from continuing to claim lives.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 15 - 
 
  4.33.   The representative of Norway  looked forward to a revised proposal that would reflect the 
comments and concerns raised by Me mbers and hoped it could constitute a constructive basis upon 
which they could pursue their discussion in the direction of a pragmatic compromise.  
4.34.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , and as a co -sponsor of the waiver, 
noted the progress  that was being made and supported the commitment to find a consensual solution 
to the proposal. Every day they were devastated by the toll that ravaged communities — more 
recently what was being seen in India was worrying. The WTO had to act quickly and d ecisively.  
4.35.   The representative of Uruguay  referred to its statement delivered at the meeting of the Heads 
of Delegations and the Trade Negotiations Committee that had taken place on 3 May, and stood 
ready to negotiate a concrete proposal which would allow f or a satisfactory and tangible outcome at 
MC12.  
4.36.   The representative of Chile looked forward to the revised proposal from the proponents, 
seeing its relevance and effectiveness to solve th e regrettable challenge of the production and 
distribution of vaccines  and reiterated Chile's commitment to the work in the TRIPS Council.  
4.37.   The representative of China  underscored that vaccine shortage and uneven distribution was 
a serious challenge to the combat against the pandemic. The second and third waves of the pandemic 
and COVID -19 variants had further highlighted the urgency of finding effective solutions. The WTO 
should play a positive role in this process  and thanked the Director General for her efforts in 
organizing the COVID -19 and Vaccine Equity webinar in mid -April. The objective of ensuring a timely, 
fair, equitable, and affordable access to vaccines, cou ld be supported by the TRIPS Council. China 
supported a continuous discussion on the waiver and stood ready to work with other Members to 
bring the negotiation into a text -based phase.  
4.38.   The representative of Zimbabwe  spoke under agenda items 2, 4, 7 and 8. On agenda item 4, 
Zimbabwe associated with the statements of waiver co -sponsors. Zimbabwe had been disappointed 
by the lack of discernible progress towards agreement on the proposed waiver since it had first been 
tabled by India and South Africa in October  2020, when there had been around 1 million COVID -19-
related deaths globally. Since then, there were more than 3 million deaths and more than 150 million 
recorded cases. Whilst grim milestones were being reached, co -sponsors had been engaged in formal 
and informal consultations where questions, queries and requests for clarification had been raised 
by opponents to the waiver, rather than finding a practical way forward. Co -sponsors and waiver -
supporters were increasingly focused on urgently addressing "vacc ine nationalism", others insisted 
on the adequacy of existing TRIPS flexibilities to address the pandemic. WHO statistics on the 
number of vaccine doses that had been produced, distributed and administered across the globe, 
revealed in graphic and deeply t roubling detail, the extent of the inequality — indeed the iniquity —
of the situation.  
4.39.   An overwhelming share of the more than 1 billion doses that had been manufactured had 
been availed to, and even stockpiled, by developed countries. The COVAX facility, d esigned to ensure 
equitable availability of vaccines to the developing world, was nowhere near attaining its stated 
targets. The fundamental challenge was the limited supply of the vaccine. IP monopolies — and their 
profit margins —in the midst of a deadly  global pandemic, was not ethical and did not make sense 
when idle or under -utilized manufacturing capacity existed across other countries, including in some 
developing countries, which with support could potentially increase vaccine production by as much 
as 1 billion doses a year. As a global community, every tool and mechanism available had to be used 
to bolster the inadequate response to the pandemic, and to address core supply -side issues. The 
proposed waiver constituted such a tool.  Although, in itsel f, it did not provide a panacea solution to 
the supply challenges, it would assist in removing existing barriers to ramped -up global production 
of and more equitable access to vaccines.  
4.40.   On agenda item 2, Zimbabwe welcomed the update on the implementation o f the Bali, Nairobi 
and Buenos Aires mandates, and recalled that in paragraphs 1.9 and 30 of the Bali and Nairobi 
Ministerial Declarations respectively, Members had reaffirmed the importance of completing the 
Doha Development Agenda of 2001. Zimbabwe remai ned committed to the full and effective 
implementation and operationalization of all Ministerial decisions and urged other Members to do 
the same.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 16 - 
 
  4.41.   On agenda item 8, Zimbabwe thanked the delegations of India and South Africa for their 
paper on the Legal Sta tus of Joint Statement Initiatives and their Negotiated Outcomes. The issues 
under discussion had potentially far -reaching implications for the integrity of the legal framework of 
the WTO, as set out in the Marrakesh Agreement; and there was need for cauti on. Zimbabwe looked 
forward to more detailed responses from JSI proponents on the various factual and legal issues 
raised in the paper.  
4.42.   On agenda item 7, Zimbabwe supported the proposal for the reinvigoration of the 1998 E -
Commerce Work Programme and was o f the view that a decision on the extension of the moratorium 
on customs duties should be made on an evidence -based approach.  
4.43.   The representative of El Salvador  remained interested in working on collective solutions. They 
looked forward to a revised version  of the proposal and to increased cooperation between Members, 
to promptly reach a balanced solution, which was acceptable to all.  
4.44.   The representative of Namibia  associated with the statements of the  African Group and the 
ACP Group . Namibia co -sponsored th e proposal and supported moving to text -based negotiations 
urgently. COVID -19 was a unique situation which required a quick intervention, and the WTO had a 
role to play. Namibia  encouraged all Members to consider supporting the proposed waiver.  
4.45.   The represe ntative of Sri Lanka  associated with the statements of the waiver proponents. 
Many experts agreed that a country had to vaccinate around 80% of its population to achieve herd 
immunity against COVID -19. Sri Lanka had received, or was expecting to receive, v accine donations 
and other financial access plans from the COVAX facility to cover approximately 20% of their 
population. The total cost of financing the vaccination of the other 60% of the population was 
estimated at around USD 139 million, which included  the cost of purchasing the cheapest vaccine , 
that was AstraZeneca Oxford , and the cost of delivering the immunization. Using World Bank 
financing cost as a basis, two doses of the vaccine for 60% of Sri Lanka’s population would amount 
to USD 336 million, over double the minimum estimated using local proxy data – the estimated 
expected range to finance Sri Lanka's long -term vaccination strategy. Further, according to health 
experts, mutated versions spreading rapidly globally would require a third vaccination dose which 
would mean that the cost was likely to increase substantially . 
4.46.   Given the difficulty of securing all necessary vaccines from a single producer, due to supply 
shortages, Sri Lanka had moved towards purchasing some of the other vaccines in limited quantities, 
which further increased their cost. The cost of a speedy vac cination would be lower than the cost of 
continuous testing, managing current incentives and prolonged lockdowns. Empirical data indicated 
that the availability of both patented and generic versions of vaccines in abundant quantities around 
the world, woul d not only secure access to vaccines over the next few years but would also ease the 
financial burdens of many developing countries and LDCs. IP rights were hindering the free flow of 
technology, technical data and other raw materials towards destinations with capacity to 
manufacture and supply generic versions of vaccines. The waiver intended to address this issue by 
providing a temporary solution and help large populations in developing countries, particularly 
countries without manufacturing capacity whic h had to rely on imports.  
4.47.   The representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia  noted  that action was required to 
ensure access to vaccines and inputs. Suspending patents would address the shortage around the 
world. Countries should work together to en sure sufficient production and distribution, so that at 
least 70% of the population could be vaccinated as soon as possible. This would require production 
throughout the world, through an innovative approach based on solidarity and complementarity. 
COVID -19 vaccination should be seen as a public good.  
4.48.   The representative of Brazil  said that Brazil  had joined as a co -sponsor the communication on 
"Enhancing the Role of the World Trade Organization in the Global Effort toward the Production and 
Distribution of COVID -19 Vaccines and other Medical Products" in WT/GC/230. Brazil aimed to find 
constructive and pragmatic ways to promote a fast scale -up of the production of vaccines, medicines 
and therapeutics against COVID -19, so that they were available, in sufficie nt quantities, for all those 
in need. Brazil had been working with bilateral partners, international organizations and different 
stakeholders to find solutions to address existing constraints to rapidly scale -up vaccine production. 
Developing countries fac ed challenges in accessing technology and know -how to produce vaccines 
and other therapeutics. This required a strengthening of collaboration and technology transfer to WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 17 - 
 
  guarantee their access to those who wished to engage in the production of vaccines and other life -
saving supplies.  
4.49.   The representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia  emphasized the importance of 
safeguarding intellectual property rights and ensuring affordable access to essential supplies to 
combat the pandemic. The COVID -19 pandemic had seve rely affected every country, no one had 
been spared. There was a collective responsibility to overcome the pandemic and to make vaccines 
available to everyone across the globe, at an affordable price. The more the capacity of developing 
and least developed  countries was enhanced to produce the necessary medical equipment and 
supplies to respond to COVID -19, the faster the world would overcome the pandemic. While 
understanding that intellectual property rights granted legal certainty to support innovations, 
Members should also ensure that intellectual property rights did not pose an obstacle to enhance 
the production of vaccines for non -commercial purposes, and to ensure equitable access to them 
and other essential supplies across the globe. The Kingdom of Sa udi Arabia urged Members to move 
forward to text -based negotiations with the aim of achieving convergence at the earliest possible.  
4.50.   The representative of Ecuador  reiterated the importance of guaranteeing universal access to 
vaccines against COVID -19, ensur ing their affordability and eliminating obstacles and delays in their 
delivery. Th e issue concerned the right to health of billions of people and had an evident impact on 
the social life and the economy of nations. Ecuador would continue to work constructi vely towards 
a consensus and multilateral action to eliminate trade obstacles that impeded equitable access to 
vaccines and their components, as well as to other medical materials for the fight against the 
pandemic.  
4.51.   The representative of Fiji valued the pr oposal as it addressed the medical loopholes they had 
been faced with in the pandemic, and the disproportionate access to vaccines and relevant 
diagnostics for the global north when compared to the global south. There was no one single solution 
to address the dire needs of Members to contain the pandemic and to save lives. Fiji asked about  
the time it would take for the WTO to move forward on this. The several discussions and debates 
that had taken place in the TRIPS Council and other forums would have offe red clarity and comfort 
regarding the waiver, as one of the key solutions to address the wide disparity in access to vaccines. 
This was even more so the case for geographically isolated small island nations, whose distance 
from key producers and suppliers had a bearing on access and costs.  Similar mistakes could not be 
afforded in the future. Finally, they cautioned against the solution being bigger than the problem 
and support ed the urgent efforts to move forward and to proceed with a text -based discussio n for 
the consideration of the General Council. Fiji also associated with the statements of the ACP Group 
and of the Pacific Group.  
4.52.   The representative of Turkey  called upon the global community to find urgent solution to 
address the worsening COVID -19 cris is and recognized that production capacity and distribution of 
vaccines and other relevant medical products still faced extreme challenges. The WTO should play a 
central role in finding an effective solution to these challenges by using all its available m echanisms, 
ensuring that no one was left behind. Strong solidarity for ramping -up supply was needed, and 
Turkey believed the WTO could craft creative solutions to save lives. Turkey looked forward to the 
revised text of the proposal and hoped it would move  discussions forward, towards an assessment 
to enter text -based discussions.  
4.53.   The representative of the United States  reiterated their commitment to advance the work on 
finding solutions to problems related to the global shortage of COVID -19 vaccines.  
4.54.   The r epresentative of the European Union  shared the objective to rapidly develop safe and 
effective therapeutics and vaccines, to manufacture them in required quantities as soon as possible 
and to distribute them equitably across the world. With several vaccine s developed and approved in 
record time, the next challenge would be  how to increase global manufacturing of COVID -19 vaccines 
in the shortest time possible. Global production of vaccines was rapidly increasing, so the efforts 
were paying off. It was estim ated that 10 billion doses of COVID -19 vaccines would be produced in 
2021, while the total global output of all vaccines combined before COVID -19 had only been 5 billion 
doses. Vaccine production was a highly complex process, which required adequate facili ties, trained 
personnel, raw materials and other inputs; and setting that up took time. Under the leadership of 
the Director -General, the WTO was actively exploring its role in the common goal of equitable access 
to COVID -19 vaccines and therapies. There w ere many promising avenues and actions that the WTO 
could and should take in order to contribute to th e goal. One set of such actions were disciplines on WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 18 - 
 
  transparency of production and supply chains as well as trade facilitation measures that could be 
further developed in the context of the Trade and Health initiative.  
4.55.   Another element was the collaboration with industry — given the urgency and technical 
complexity of manufacturing COVID -19 vaccines, governments should facilitate broad co -operation 
between v accine developers and manufacturers, based on transfers of technology and know -how. 
The European Union considered that vaccine developers should be ready to enter into arrangements 
that would facilitate the supply at cost of vaccines to low - and middle -income countries. Th at would 
be the best way to speed up supply in the European Union and globally; and it would  also be the 
best way to tackle new variants of the virus. The TRIPS Agreement and the principles of the Doha 
Declaration could play a role in addr essing the crisis. They reflected a careful balance between 
protecting intellectual property on one hand, which was a crucial incentive to innovation, and 
promoting widespread access to medicines and health care, on the other. The flexibilities offered by 
the TRIPS Agreement, including compulsory licensing, were absolutely legitimate tools in times of 
the pandemic.  
4.56.   Even if voluntary arrangements were the most promising avenue to ramp -up vaccine 
production, it was important for each Member to ensure that its  legal framework on compulsory 
licensing was effective. For instance, to ensure that in the context of a national emergency such as 
the pandemic, certain requirements — such as the obligation to negotiate with patent holders — 
could be waived. Not all Memb ers of the WTO foresaw that possibility in their domestic laws. Several 
Members had not yet implemented the TRIPS amendments concerning compulsory licences for 
export. An effective legal framework was key for a swift reaction and should be available to all  
Members. The European Union was ready to discuss how to facilitate the implementation of the 
TRIPS Agreement flexibilities and to support a statement that reaffirmed the TRIPS flexibilities, 
confirming that during a pandemic the obligation to negotiate wi th the right -holder could be waived 
and that a compulsory license could cover exports to all countries that lacked manufacturing 
capacity.  
4.57.   The representative of Egypt  associated with the statement delivered by the African Group, 
and recalled their previous statement at the Council on that issue emphasizing the increasing number 
of co-sponsor countries of the waiver while the supply demand gap was widening, and letting the 
vaccine inequality problem to continue, simply indicated that the current efforts of the international 
community to contain the pandemic were not enough and that vaccinating the global population as 
quickly as possible required additional production ca pacity. They stressed the urgent need to explore 
all alternatives at hand, including the TRIPS waiver, and to move to text -based negotiations on how 
to ensure that IP rights were not creating barriers to access medicines, diagnostics and therapeutics, 
while at the same time maintaining the motivation for research and development.  
4.58.   The representative of Japan  noted that Japan continued to actively contribute to the ACT 
Accelerator and believed its framework for multilateral cooperation was the most effective way to 
achieve timely, fair and equitable access to medical products. The production of vaccines was a very 
complicated process.  Japan had been  importing all vaccines and struggl ed to create production 
lines. With regard to the complexity of technology tr ansfer, it was essential to encourage cooperation 
with pharmaceutical companies in order to scale -up the global production capacity of vaccines. Japan 
supported the Director General's initiative to find a third way, through dialogues with pharmaceutical 
companies and promoting a pragmatic cooperation among capable manufacturers. Japan would 
engage in the discussion at the TRIPS Council on how the proposed waiver related to real solutions 
to the concrete challenges being faced, through increased production a nd procurement of COVID -19 
vaccines, therapeutics, diagnostics and other medical products.  
4.59.   The representative of the Philippines  supported the recommendation to continue discussions 
on the waiver, as part of the broader conversation on the role of trade an d intellectual property in 
combating global pandemics, such as COVID -19, to make it an essential component of an effective 
and comprehensive multilateral response of the WTO to the current pandemic. The Philippines was 
keeping an open mind on the issue and  support ed consideration of the third way or the third 
approach , proposed by the Director General.  
4.60.   The representative of Switzerland  observed that the Membership shared the common 
objective of ensuring global, equitable and timely access to medical product s, including vaccines. 
However, different views remained on the approach to achieve th e shared objective. As outlined in 
the status report, further consideration of the matter was needed in the TRIPS Council.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 19 - 
 
  4.61.   Switzerland referred to their statement deliver ed at the TNC/HODs meeting the previous 
Monday where we set out the four axis of the holistic approach that should be applied to deal 
efficiently with this and future pandemics, and highlighted the importance of the third way.  
4.62.   The representative of Singapo re noted that while Members wanted to ramp -up production of 
COVID -19 vaccines to collectively vanquish the virus, they had also learnt from the vaccine event 
that the Director General convened on 14 April, that increasing production and enhancing the 
distribution of COVID -19 vaccines was a highly complex and non -linear process. It involved more 
than just acquiring a patent, it required know -how, including the skills and equipment for quality 
control. A practical and pragmatic way forward had to be found, an d the way to achieve that was to 
listen to vaccine developers and manufacturers regarding impediments such as export restrictions, 
disruptions to supply chain connectivity and domestic regulations, as important factors. Importantly, 
they had also heard tha t: (a) intellectual property had never hindered efforts to ramp up vaccine 
production; (b) intellectual property had facilitated partnerships between vaccine developers and 
manufacturers; and (c) it was important to avoid any actions that could jeopardi ze the trust that the 
IP system ha d engendered between developers and manufacturers, especially at this critical 
juncture. A holistic response should be sought, one that struck a balance between adopting practical 
steps in the short term and starting to think  about how to ensure that the WTO was better prepared 
for the next pandemic in the longer term. Singapore looked forward to deepening discussions and 
bridging the gaps.  
4.63.   The representative of India said that that, as they spoke, the pandemic continued to raise 
globally with more than 155 million cases and 3.2 million deaths.  The rapid surge in many 
developing and developed countries of COVID -19's new variants and mutations were an ongoing 
and increa sing risk. The pandemic was more severe than ever, more transmissible, there were not 
enough vaccines, and the virus was gathering strength and speed.  
4.64.   Despite public funding and tremendous scientific progress by publicly funded universities that 
resulted in successful COVID -19 vaccines, global vaccination had been  lagging behind. Vaccine 
manufacturing could not be relied on to meet the needs of the world, vaccine production needed to 
be scaled -up as rapidly as possible. Addressing intellectual property cha llenges was a prerequisite 
to meet that objective in the shortest possible timeframe. Since the meeting in March, two events 
had taken place to encourage vaccine manufacturers to scale up vaccine production.  The Secretariat 
had been urged to compile data as part of a monitoring and transparency exercise, on how many 
voluntary licensing agreements had been achieved as an outcome of those events, how many 
additional vaccine doses had been added to the overall capacity from the base -line scenario and how 
many  of such doses had been delivered to developing and least developed countries. This 
transparency exercise would be useful to see the extent to which these initiatives delivered. India 
supported all such initiatives that could help in ramping -up manufacturi ng in parallel. The present 
approach had raised serious concerns that production and supply were being artificially constrained 
as they observed a consistent failure to leverage global manufacturing capacity to deliver equitable 
access. Notwithstanding the  requirement of booster doses that were produced in response to the 
emergence of variants and mutations, the world needed more than 10 billion doses annually. Given 
that the existing approach could deliver only 4% of the output in 2020, India encouraged a reflection 
on how and from where current requirements would be met.  
4.65.   The current system was not adequate. Manufacturers in different parts of the world with 
vaccine production capacity in the millions were lying idle. There had been estimates that there 
would be enough vaccines in 2021 but overall production had not reached  one fourth of the 
projections for the first quarter of 2021. Economists had shown that delaying vaccine deployment in 
the developing world threatened the safety of citizens in the developed world.  
4.66.   Most Members had appropriated trillions of dollars as fis cal and monetary stimulus for 
emergency relief for travel, tourism, hospitality and other industries and were planning billions more 
such stimulus. Those industries would remain in crisis and reliant on government help until the 
pandemic eased. The faster the emergency could be brought to an end, the faster those industries 
could recover. The TRIPS waiver was one of the tools to help end the pandemic and a strong global 
recovery. Global recovery could not rely on uncertain vaccine production, moral reasons had failed, 
and a temporary TRIPS waiver was an option worth exploring.  
4.67.   Globally , there were 1.8 million deaths reported from COVID -19 in 2020 and there would be 
even more deaths in 2021, but that was not inevitable. Pandemics were not natural disasters, as WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 20 - 
 
  the Director General had said, they were under Members' control. COVID -19 could be controlled if 
manufacturing was boosted through textual discussions on the waiver proposal. Failure to respond 
in a timely manner on the TRIPS waiver proposal undermined the legitimacy and credibility of the 
WTO. India urged Members to give the tool a chance to succeed and save lives and the economy.  
4.68.   The Director -General  extend ed again  her sympath y to the Members whose countries were 
experiencing an upsurge in COVID -19 ca ses at th at moment — India, Brazil, Nepal, Sri Lanka, and 
others — and thank ed other Members who ha d also sought to help th ose countries under stress, 
which was the sign of solidarity that the WTO  sought to promote among its Members. The fact was 
that it show ed that they we re all in it together. The way the WTO handle d that matter was critical. 
Members  needed to have a sense of urgency on how they approach ed that issue of response to 
COVID -19 because the world was watching. The  issue of equitable access to vaccines, diagnostics 
and therapeutics was both the moral and economic issue of the time. Vaccine policy was economic 
policy because the global economic recovery c ould not be sustained unless they found a way to get 
equitable access to vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics. Members need ed to act on four fronts  
and have the wholesome approach that some of them  had mentioned.  
4.69.   First, Members should share their vaccines . Those who ha d ordered more than they truly 
needed should sha re with others , either through the COVAX Facility or other mechanisms. Those 
who ha d raw materials should allow th em to flow through supply chains so that all who c ould 
manufacture c ould take advantage of th em. Members  should pay attention to the availabil ity of 
skilled workers who c ould also help in the production of th ose commodities.  
4.70.   Second,  Members  needed to look at the issue of export restrictions and prohibitions , 
bureaucratic procedures and customs procedures that could  confront supply chain mobility with 
respect to the manufacture of products to combat COVID -19. When listen ing to manufacturers at 
the 14 April event that many Members ha d referred to, it had been  clear that Members  needed to 
be mindful to the issue of allowing supply chains to work. Otherwise, no matter what capacity they 
had, they would still not be able to manufacture what was needed. She was happy to say that the 
number of export restrictions or prohibitions ha d come down from 109 to 51 , but Members  needed 
to keep it moving down.  
4.71.   Third, Members  needed to work with manufacturers to enable them to mobili ze existing 
capacity that was idle to manufacture. Members  had heard from countries like Pakistan , Bangladesh, 
India, South Africa, Indonesia  and Senegal, among others,  that there was some existing capacity 
that c ould be turned around in some months to be able to allow  them to manufacture the kinds of 
doses they would  need to go from the 5 billion dos es produced in the world at present  to the 
10.8 billion being forecast ed for 2021 to 15 billion, in particular , if the world were to  need booster 
doses.  
4.72.   Members  could not act soon enough to put manufacturing capacity that was idle at work 
immediately and to invest in additional manufacturing capacity for the future. They also ha d to think 
of how to deal not just with t he pandemic , but of what role the WTO was going to p lay to ensure 
that the organization  met the needs of its Members in a future pandemic or even the continuation 
of the current  one. Countries like the Russia n Federation , China, Brazil  and Cuba, who ha d vaccines 
under development or who were already sharing  their vaccines with others, should look at ways to 
boost supplies so they could increase the volume of vaccines in the world. Those who need ed to get 
Emergency Use Authorization from the WHO to enable access to their vaccines should do so.  
4.73.   She was happy t o hear that the proponents of the TRIPS waiver were putting together a 
revised text. It was incumbent on Members  to move quickly to put the revised text on the table but 
also to begin and undertake text -based negotiations. She was firmly convinced that onc e Members  
could sit down with an actual text in front of them, they would  find a pragmatic way forward 
acceptable to all sides that allow ed the kinds of answers that the developing country Members were 
looking at with respect to vaccines  while at the same time looking at research and innovation and 
how to protect them. Members  just need ed the will to sit down. Too many people were dying as 
many Members ha d already repeated w ith numbers. They needed to treat th e whole issue with a 
sense of urgen cy. On her part , she was  following up on the workshop by trying to engage with 
manufacturers to see how the WTO  could work faster with them. The WTO was  also joining the 
Vaccine Manufacturers Task Force put together by CEPI, Gavi and the WHO. She thanked a ll 
Members for  trying to move towards the conclusion on th e issue.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 21 - 
 
  4.74.   The Chairman  encourage d all Members  to remain positively engaged in the further discussions 
in the TRIPS Council with a view to finding a solution that was acceptable to all. Members  were 
engaging and exchanging intensively  – and th at was positive. Th at was an important matter which 
require d willingness to listen to each other, understanding and flexibility. He again thank ed the 
TRIPS Council Chair man for his status report and, as  had been mentioned  earlier , the TRIPS Council 
would report back to the General Council in line with Article IX:3 of the Marrakesh Agreement.  
4.75.   The General Council took note  of the TRIPS Council Chair man's report and of the statements4. 
5  TRADE RELATED CHALLENGES OF THE LEAST DEVELOPED COUNTRIES AND WAY 
FORWARD: A DRAFT FOR MC DECISION (WT/GC/W/807)  
5.1.  The Chairman  recalled that the  item was included in the agenda at the request of Chad on 
behalf of the LDC Group and was related to the Communication from th e LDC Group on Trade Related 
Challenges of the Least Developed Countries and Way Forward in document WT/GC/W/807 , that 
include d a proposed Draft Ministerial Conference Decision. He recalled that, i n March, the LDC Group 
had requested assistance from the G eneral Council  Chair man to facilitat e a conversation on th e 
matter. In response to th at request, he had  held a preliminary round of informal consultations with 
21 delegations. Th ose had included the delegations that had intervened in the G eneral Council  
meetings in December and March, nine Group Coordinators and the Chairs of the bodies in which 
the issue ha d also been raised. He had  also held very constructive conversations with the Coordinator 
of the LDC Group a nd the LDC Focal Point on Graduation.  
5.2.  During  the consultations, delegations had expressed their sympathy and understanding about 
the challenges faced by LDCs and were open to engage with them in a constructive manner. Some 
specific clarifications on the proposal had been  sought and most of th ose que stions had also been 
raised in last two General Council meetings. Th ose include d: (i) the rationale of the proposal 
including its relationship with the UN process; (ii) the length of the 12 -year transition period and its 
relationship with other existing flexibilities; (iii) the horizontal approach in seeking a solution in 
particular in light of the different challenges LDCs face d and the varying impacts of graduation on 
the LDCs and (iv) the issue of graduated LDCs benefiting more in particular vis-à-vis Members at 
similar levels of development who ha d never enjoyed LDC preferences.  
5.3.  Delegations had also put forward some initial suggestions which he had shared with the LDC 
Group. Other delegations had also noted that the substance of the proposal i ntersect ed and carrie d 
implications for the broader discussion on S&DT and development at the WTO as well as for LDC 
proposals discussed in other WTO Bodies which should be borne in mind. As he had  said, he had  
met with the LDC Coordinator and the Focal Po int on LDC Graduation at the beginning and at the 
end of th e initial round of consultations. They had had a very constructive exchange. He unders tood 
that the LDCs ha d been reaching out to delegations and he had  encouraged the Group to continue 
its outreac h in particular to clarify the questions that Members ha d raised on the proposal.  
5.4.  The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , thanked the Chairman for the various 
consultations that he had undertaken on the LDC proposal as well as the main points ra ised during 
those discussions which he had shared with the LDCs. That greatly helped to clarify the different 
positions of Members and to identify areas where differences still needed to be resolved. Overall, 
many Members understood the challenges faced by  graduating LDCs and that they were willing to 
engage constructively to address them. Certain Members however still had concerns regarding 
certain aspects of the proposal, namely: the rationale, the proposed 12 -year period, the horizontal 
approach and the issue of differentiation. Chad would briefly address  the concerns related to the 
reasoning of the proposal and Bangladesh, the LDC Focal Point on Graduation, would elaborate on 
the other elements.  
5.5.  Regarding the process of a smooth transition to the WTO, so me Members had asked whether 
the United Nations preparatory period before graduation was sufficient. The main objective of 
graduation was to avoid the graduating country returning to the LDC category. That required the 
establishment of a support mechanism after the country had graduated from the LDC category. In 
view of that, the concept of a smooth transition was one that began after graduation and not during 
or before. To graduate from LDC status, a country should meet the graduation criteria in two 
 
4 At its request, the statement of the delegation of Colombia is incorporated in the Minutes of this  General 
Council meeting and can be found in Annex 1 of this document.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 22 - 
 
  conse cutive triennial reviews. During the three -year period following the second review, once the 
country had been recommended for graduation, LDCs were encouraged to develop a smooth 
transition strategy to identify the necessary steps to be taken after graduat ion in accordance with 
UNGA Resolution A/RES/59/209. That transition began only when the country ceased to be an LDC.  
5.6.  During that period, trade and development partners should support the transition and avoid 
the sudden removal of specific support measure s for LDCs. UN Resolution A/RES/67/221 on a 
smooth transition clearly stipulated that the extension of provisions on special and differential 
treatment or the phasing out of preferences should be granted to those countries that had already 
graduated and no t those that were in the process of graduation. For those reasons, any smooth 
transition mechanism for graduated LDCs should therefore be designed to start once graduation was 
effective. All smooth transition mechanisms followed that approach. For example,  some Members, 
such as the European Union or Turkey continued to apply their DFQF plans to LDCs for a certain 
period after graduation. Similarly, LDCs continued to have access to the Enhanced Integrated 
Framework facilities for a number of years after grad uation from LDC status.  
5.7.  Concerning the other points raised by Members, Bangladesh, as the LDC Focal Point on 
Graduation, would continue providing responses to them. The LDCs hoped that those elements would 
help to clarify the issue and lead Members towards  consensus. The LDC Group encouraged the 
Chairman to continue to facilitate consultations in small groups and looked forward to working with 
Members to bridge the remaining gaps. The LDCs also thanked him for keeping that critical item on 
the General Counc il's agenda until final consensus was reached before MC12.  
5.8.  The representative of Bangladesh  associated with  the statement of the LDC Group and thanked 
the Chairman  for the consultations he had undertaken on the LDC Proposal and for sharing the main 
elements of those discussions. Th at had certainly helped the LDCs to clarify and respond to some of 
the queries and concerns. Bangladesh also thanked all Members and Group Coordinators  who ha d 
already extended their support to th at submission  and who ha d given the LDCs  the opportunit y to 
engage with them to clarify certain issues. Chad ha d already  addressed some of the concerns earlier  
and had provided further rationale in support of the submission. Bangladesh would  complement 
Chad's statement  by responding  to a few questions that had been  conveyed to the LDC  Group.  
5.9.  On the duration of the proposed transition  period,  some Members ha d questioned its length of 
twelve  years.  That period  correspond ed to the estimated time graduating LDCs could  require to 
adapt themselves to the new status i.e. before losing the trade -related support measures. That said, 
the LDC Group was open to discuss ing the duration period. What was important was however to 
acknowl edge and agree in principle that the smooth transition was necessary and should apply to 
all LDC specific provisions and to all LDCs after graduation. Several recent UN reports predict ed that 
the ongoing pandemic w ould severely affect the progress made by the LDCs over the past decades 
and w ould significantly reverse their hard -earned development gains accrued during th at period. 
UNCTAD 's LDC Report 2020 forecast ed that the pandemic w ould push LDCs to their worst economic 
performance in thirty  years, with f alling income levels, widespread employment losses and widening 
fiscal deficits. The UN 2021 Financing for Sustainable Development Report ha d projected that the 
pandemic could lead to "a lost decade for development ". Overall, the future was an uncertain jo urney 
for LDCs , including those on the path to graduation . Members should  consider th ose uncertainties 
while taking positions on the current proposal for the graduated LDCs.  
5.10.   On the issue of the horizontal approach , some Members had  questioned th e approach  that 
the LDCs  had adopted on th e issue, saying that the smooth transition question should not apply to 
all LDC -specific support measures or to all graduating LDCs equally. Such proposition to apply 
selectivity or categorize those  within the LDC Group which were by default at the bottom of the 
development echelon , was not only unhelpful but also lacking any justification or legality. It w ould 
negate the main objective of the proposal , which was to provide predictability and legal certainly for 
a smooth transition to graduation , as envisaged under relevant UN resolutions.  Limiting the scope 
to specific measures or to some Members , would in essence defeat the whole purpose of a formalized 
and predictable smooth transition process. More specifically, a  case-by-case approach as suggested 
by some w ould result in a situation where the success in securing support for smooth transition 
would depend on the negotiating capacity of a single graduating LDC. It w ould be unfair on the 
graduating LDCs , who were kno wn to have capacity constraints. A case -by-case approach would not 
be practical for another reason.  There were sixteen  LDCs in the graduation pipeline. It w ould mean 
sixteen  separate submissions to be negotiated , costing huge time and energy of the Members hip, 
particularly of the LDCs, who d id not have sufficient resources to deploy for such. It ma de no sense.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 23 - 
 
  As all LDC -specific support measures appl ied to all LDCs, support for smooth transition should also 
be accessible to all LDCs , irrespective of differ ences in one or a few indicators among them.  
5.11.   On differentiation, some Members ha d raised concerns that the proposal could lead to 
graduated LDCs receiving better treatment than some non -LDC developing Members. The proposed 
decision d id not suggest new or additional S &DT for graduating LDCs but simpl y the continuation of 
existing support measures for a few more years to them.  It could  be true that some graduating LDCs 
had a few development indicators better tha n some non -LDC developing Members , but that would 
have been the case regardless of the fate of the proposed LDC Decision. The LDC Graduation 
threshold was set at a higher level than the inclusion threshold. It was therefore possible that some 
graduating LDC s could  have higher indicators of income, human asset or economic vulnerability than 
a few developing countries. Th at wa s done by design to avoid a situation where a Graduating LDC 
fell back in the LDC Category. The notion of smooth transition , as envisage d by the UN , was not 
conditioned to the Graduating LDCs to have lower development indicators than any other non -LDC. 
There was no rationale to apply th at conditionality in the WTO context either.  
5.12.   The LDCs were demanding nothing ne w. They were simply reque sting the continuation of the 
flexibilities already given to them for a few more years , to support their smooth transition. The LDC 
Group contribute d to less than 1% of world trade. Extending the special treatment to LDCs for twelve  
years after graduation would hardly have any impact on global trade  but would greatly benefit the 
LDCs in their sustainable development journey.  
5.13.   Bangladesh joined Chad in requesting the Chairman to continue facilitating small group 
consultations. Bangladesh  looked forward to engaging with Members to resolve the remaining 
differences. What was important was to achieve a positive outcome before MC12 which w ould send 
a strong signal to all LDCs awai ting graduation that the international community w ould stand by 
them – not abandon them immediately after graduat ing. 
5.14.   The representative of Angola  associated with the statement of the LDC Group . All Members  
knew that graduated LDCs would continue to face e normous development challenges , aggravated 
lately by the C OVID -19 pandemic and its disastrous economic consequences , that had put those 
countries at a disadvantage in their international trade participation. Graduating and graduated LDCs 
that ha d high expo rt concentration on one commodity w ould first need development strategies that 
looked to achieve concrete results in key areas such as agriculture, services and trade facilitation, 
infrastructure, training, diversification and improvement of productivity a nd competitiveness of their 
economies and institutional development. It was in th at spirit that it request ed Members to consider 
the proposal for a M inisterial Decision . 
5.15.   The representative of Nepal  associated  with the statement of the LDC Group. Sustainable and 
inclusive export constitute d a critical pillar for the overall socio -economic development of a country. 
LDCs cover ed about 13% of the world population , however account ed for  less than 1% of world 
export. 21.3% of Members a nd 32% of Observer Governments in the WTO were LDCs. Achieving 
global targets of LDC Graduation and SDGs was a common agenda. Since the creation of the LDC 
Category, six LDCs ha d graduated, three would  graduate in  the near future and five more were in 
the path to graduation after a few years. LDCs d id not intend to be in their current status forever. 
Even at a time of severe uncertainty, none of the LDCs were denying the UN process of graduation. 
Encouraging all LDCs towards graduation through necessary sup port mechanism s therefore became 
urgent. The COVID -19 pandemic ha d impacted the LDCs , including graduating LDC s, most severely. 
Recovery of those economies was almost impossible without specific additional and robust support 
measures.  Graduation present ed additional challenges to their trade and development , with a great 
risk of falling back into the LDC Category if their progress were not sustained.  
5.16.   LDCs need ed Members ' special attention on future ways of sustaining their graduation.  
Graduation was not an end in itself but just a threshold with some artificially set number to measure 
some indicators , whereas several other aspects of socio -economic development r emain ed 
untouched.  Graduated LDCs lost access to a wide range of international support measures  which  
could create a further gap if sufficient support was not strengthened to sustain their progress.  It was 
therefore imperative that the globally accepted p rinciple of "smooth transition " was recogni zed and 
support measures were continued for a longer transition period. UNCTAD 's LDC Report 2020 
forecast ed that the pandemic w ould push LDCs to their worst economic performance in thirty  years 
with falling income  levels, widespread employment losses and widening fiscal deficits. The UN 2021 
Financing for Sustainable Development Report ha d projected that the pandemic could  lead to "a lost WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 24 - 
 
  decade for development ". Overall, the future was an uncertain journey for LDCs including those on 
the path to graduation.  The report ha d strongly recommended post -graduation extension of existing 
special support measures. The Progress Report on Implementation of the Programme of Action for 
the Least Developed Countries for the D ecade 2011 –2020 call ed for "stepped -up support for the 
smooth transition of and a package of incentives for graduating countries ".  
5.17.   In international trade, th ose measures range d from DFQF  market access for LDC exports  and 
S&DT  in WTO provisions , to technic al assistance and capacity building measures. An incomplete and 
fragile graduation without a specific support mechanism could  lead LDCs after graduation to more 
difficulties in addition to the existing constraints they face d. Graduating LDCs were therefore  in dire 
need of contin uing existing LDC -specific support measures for  twelve years , as reflected in the 
submission. It w ould be instrumental in sustaining LDCs ' export performance even after graduation  
and would contribute to establishing a smooth transit ion mechanism in the WTO which would  provid e 
predictability and legal certainty. LDCs were not demanding any new or additional support from 
Members . They were  simply  requesting to continue the flexibilities already given to LDCs for a few 
more years to sup port their smooth transition after graduation. Th at support w ould not make any 
visible negative implication in the global trading system , as the entire LDCs account ed for less than 
1% share in world export. It was not a matter of the  LDCs begging from Members to grant that 
mechanism . It was r ather a  vital aspect of global cooperation and collaboration towards achieving 
the broad objectives of the Marrakesh Agreement jointly and contributing to attaining other global 
goals including LD C Graduation, SDGs and others. Once Ministers at MC12 decide d on the matter , a 
strong signal would be sent in favour of both LDCs and the entire multilateral trading system. It 
would not only contribute to sustain LDC G raduation , it would  also encourage al l LDCs towards early 
graduation and to attain SDGs by 2030 , through an enhanced level of global cooperation.  
5.18.   The representative of Fiji was fully cognizant of the context of many small island developing 
States, as in the Pacific , and the varying degree of challenges faced by LDCs including the newly 
graduat ed LDCs in the Pacific , which were in a similar state as other LDCs.  Over the years, th at had 
been a concern . There were no proper support mechanism s in place to allow such Members to transit 
smoothly once flexibilities they had previously been entitled to were withdrawn. In many 
circumstances , they were worse off , placing their economies in dire need of support. As it had raised 
in its previous intervention on the Work Progra mme for Small Economies, many of the small 
economies who were also LDCs were susceptible to natural disasters , which posed billions of dollars 
in losses and damages each year – aggravat ing their situation in view of their limited trade capacities  
and distance from trading markets , among others . Fiji therefore recognize d and support ed the 
initiative , which should feature as an outcome at MC12 . Fiji associated with the statements of the 
ACP Group and of the Pacific Group.  
5.19.   The representative of Tanzania  associ ated with  the statement of the  LDC Group and support ed 
the proposal for adoption by the General Council for a Ministerial Decision that w ould provide a soft 
landing for graduating LDCs. The LDC Category had been  established by the UN General Assembly 
in 1971 for countries with special economic needs. The Istanbul Programme of Action was an 
important UN instrument intended to lift LDCs from poverty cycles by 2021. Its focus had been  to 
reduce vulnerabilities of LD Cs from externalities through increasing productive capacities and linkage 
to the markets. Over the decade, the WTO, like other UN Agencies, ha d played a key role as one of 
the vehicles to implement the programme. Among the key role s played by the WTO for LDCs include d 
the implementation of preferential market access, preferential rules of origin, S&DT such as the 
LDCs' exemption from certain WTO commitments , or flexible commitments  and the  provision of 
trade -related technical assistance, among others . All those measures ha d immensely supported the 
growth of LDCs  – a couple of whom  were scheduled to graduat e soon. Those achievements could 
however  easily be ruined in a short period of time if graduating LDCs were not  provided a soft 
landing. Considering the i mportant role the WTO had been  playing in lifting LDCs from structural 
challenges and supporting them in their  graduat ion, it w ould be wise for Members to support the 
proposed decision to help graduated LDCs avoid f rom falling  back to LDC  status in the future. Even 
birds kn ew better how to slowly get rid of their hatchlings from nests . Members should  therefore 
appropriately handle LDC graduation without disrupti ng the gains  attained . 
5.20.   The representative of Barbados  recalled  that since the UN had recogni zed the LDC Status in 
1971, only six countries ha d graduated from th e LDC  Category  – with four other s set to graduat e 
between 2021 and 2024 . Graduation from LDC Status was a significant milestone in a country's 
development . Despite th e alleviation in  development status, the shock of losing development 
assistance, S&DT  and other concessions  require d some transition for small and developing Members  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 25 - 
 
  graduating from such status. Flexibilities should be given due to their high susceptibilities and 
vulnerab ilities to external shocks , especially economic and environmental in terms of climate change. 
Barbados support ed the proposal presented by the LDC Group and urge d Members to approve th at 
decision at MC12 . Barbados associate d with the statements  of CARICOM and the ACP  Group . 
5.21.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the Pacific Group , associated with the statements 
of the LDC Group and the ACP Group and noted that Vanuatu had recently graduated from the LDC 
Category. Apart f rom the loss of trade preferences and Aid for Trade support after graduation, LDCs 
faced ongoing challenges from climate change a nd frequent and severe natural disasters that 
undermine d development efforts. SVEs were small , open economies that were still s usceptible to 
external shocks and face d high trade costs. Graduation w ould not remove th ose threshold 
challenges. The Pacific Group  reiterate d its support for th e draft decision as it provide d certainty and 
predictability for LDC Members through the contin uity of market access and Aid for Trade support 
for twelve  years from graduation. Th at would facilitate the ir smooth and successful transition into 
the multilateral trading system. The Pacific Group therefore encourag ed Members to support th e 
draft decision.  
5.22.   The representative of Jamaica , on behalf of the  ACP Group , pledge d its full support for th at 
important submission on behalf of the LDC Group. The ACP  Group commend ed the approach being 
taken to further the interests of LDCs and graduated L DCs within the WTO and in the global trading 
system, especially in light of the COVID -19 pandemic , which w ould have a lasting impact on th ose 
Members. Graduation was never automatically accompanied by favourable conditions that warrant ed 
immediate relinqui shment of LDC flexibilities. A transition period was of utmost importance to 
graduating LDCs. The proposed transition period in the submission was reasonable to allow th ose 
Members to face significant trade and development challenges post -graduation. As a group of 
developing and LDC  Members , the ACP  Group could relate to the LDCs' vulnerabilities  which the 
COVID -19 pandemic ha d exposed and exacerbated. LDCs had already been grappling to be fully 
integrated into the global trade system and the pandemic could undo all the strides that would have 
been made over the past few years. The ACP Group support ed the LDCs ' submissio n and  looked 
forward to further productive engagement on  the matter to support LDCs , including graduating LDCs, 
in their developmental aspirations and their efforts to integrate into the multilateral trading system.  
5.23.   The representative of China  recognize d the enormous challenges and high vulnerability LDCs 
faced, particularly during the global pandemic. A recent analysis by the Secretariat reveal ed that 
LDCs ha d been hit harder by the COVID -19 crisis compared to the world as a whole. LDCs ha d seen 
a 10.3 % decline in exports of merchandise trade in 2020 and a 10.5 % decline in imports  – sharper 
than the global 7.7% decline in exports and 7.8% decline in imports. The drop of LDC  services 
exports wa s estimated to be around 40 % in the first three quarters of 2020, double the decline by 
the rest of the world , which was 19%. China s aw the importance and necessity for continued 
international support for LDCs to keep the pandemic in check and to better integrate into the world 
economy. As one of the most open markets to the LDCs, China was and ha d continued implementing 
zero tariffs for 97% of its tariff lines for LDC exports to China. Transitional periods ha d already been 
provided for recently  graduated LDCs. For the purpose of th e proposal, China call ed on Members ' 
collective engagement towards a possible solution and a meaningful outcome by MC12.  
5.24.   The representative of Saint Lucia , on behalf of CARICOM , associated with the statement of 
the ACP  Group . The Marrakesh Agreement recognize d the need for positive efforts d esigned to 
ensure that developing countries , and especially the least developed among them ha d a share in  
international trade commensurate with the needs of economic development. It was in th at context 
that the WTO system ha d been designed to guarantee max imum flexibilities for LDCs. The CARICOM 
Group therefore  fully endorsed  the proposal contained in document WT/GC/W/807 on LDC transition . 
5.25.   The representative of South Africa  associated with statements of the Africa n Group and the 
ACP Group and referred to the statement it had  made on th e issue in  the December and the April  
General Council meeting s. The Istanbul Programme of Action for the LDCs for the Decade 2011 –
2020 include d as an overarching objective the graduation and smooth transition of LDCs. Gra duation 
from the U N LDC Category was seen as an important milestone in the development path of each 
LDC. At the same time, the phasing  out of benefits associated with the LDC Status could present 
challenges for graduating LDC governments to integrate into the global economy. LDCs face d 
significant trade and development challenges  – more so in the context of the COVID -19 pandemic. 
South Africa reiterate d its support for the LDCs ' submissions in documents WT/GC/W /806 and 
WT/GC/W/ 807 and look ed forward to cons tructive discussions towards a decision at MC12.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 26 - 
 
  5.26.   The representative of Mauritius , on behalf of the African Group , reiterate d its support to the 
submission by the LDC Group in document WT/GC/W/807  and called on the General Council to 
approve that the draft decision be submitted for a decision by MC12. The draft decision proposed by 
the LDC Group would allow LDCs to continue benefitting from LDC specific support measures and 
S&DT and flexibilities for twelve  years after graduation. There was no need to reemphasi ze that 
graduation was a continuous process and that LDC should be given adequate transition time to 
adequately prepare to face post -graduation challenges. There was no one better placed than the 
LDCs themselves to propose the most app ropriate duration of such transition period.  Immediately 
removing S &DT and flexibilities from graduating LDCs w ould certainly put the latter in a difficult 
situation especially given their already vulnerable situation. In the absence of appropriate support , 
the LDCs ' transition w ould not therefore  be sustainable and their graduation w ould make little 
difference. An incomplete and fragile graduation without a specific support mechanism could  lead 
newly graduated LDCs to be subject to more difficulties. The d raft MC12 Decision w ould be a genuine 
response to the UNGA Resolutions A/RES/ 59/209 of 2004 and A/RES/ 67/221 of 2012 that invite d 
"all Members of the WTO to consider extending to graduated countries the existing special and 
differential treatment measures and exemptions available to least developed countries for a period 
appropriate to the development situation of the country".  
5.27.   The representative of India said that India had been a strong supporter of LDC integration  
into the multilateral trading system and  had been at the forefront of efforts to increase their share 
in global trade. India provide d DFQF market access  to about 96% of tariff lines for goods originating 
from LDCs, and an additional 2.15% , bringing the total to  98.15% of tariff lines. India was the fourth 
biggest export destination for goods originating in LDCs . India  also r an a dedicated centre for WTO 
studies for technical assistance and capacity building activities to help LDCs to better integrate into 
the multilateral trading system. As the submission note d, LDCs suffer ed from various capacity 
constraints and economic vulnerabilities. India therefore support ed that a reasonable period of time 
be granted as a transition period for ensuring a smooth transition for graduating LDCs under the 
WTO system , and request ed Members to consider th e proposal.  
5.28.   The representative of Indonesia  acknowledge d the challenges faced by  LDCs, especially during 
the pandemic. Indonesia also view ed S&DT  in trade rules as one of the key tools to address those 
challenges . The WTO should also expand the period of time where graduating LDCs could still enjoy 
a safety  net period under the S&DT  blanket. Th at period w ould provide a clear path for them to 
ensure full integration into international trade despite the challenges. Indonesia extend ed support 
to the draft decision as annex ed in document WT/GC/W/807.  
5.29.   The representative of Uganda  associated with the statements of the LDC Group. The impact 
that the COVID -19 ha d had and continue d to have in many economies c ould not be ignored. While 
many LDCs ha d made significant economic progress in structur al transformation , much of the 
progress ha d been and w ould continue to be undermined by the virus. As other LDCs , many 
Graduating LDCs w ould have to grapple with the effects of the rapid slowdown of activity particularly 
in the urban informal sector and movement of labour back to farming. Equally challenging w ould be 
the significantly reduced  income, a vital issue given the high level s of vulnerability and poverty in 
LDCs – making th e extension of  support  and flexibilities for the smooth transition of Graduat ed LDCs 
even more  necessary . The provision  of the conditions favourable for graduation require d carefully 
calculated intervention executed in the right manner and for a little mor e time. LDC Graduation was 
not only a win for LDCs.  It was also  a win for all Members. Uganda  therefore call ed upon all Members 
to accord much -needed support to graduating LDCs and to agree to the draft Ministerial Decision 
proposed by the LDC  Group for ad option at MC12.  
5.30.   The representative of the United States  appreciated the LDCs ' outreach and look ed forward 
to continuing the discussion with them as it worked to understand several aspects of th e proposal 
and its potential implications. The proposal raise d interesting questions about horizontal equity, or 
in that case, potentially significant inequity. That was, under th e proposal, any graduating LDC would 
continue to receive special treatment and  preferences that were available only to LDCs for twelve  
years past graduation.  A non-LDC Member that score d lower on various development indicators than 
the graduating LDC would not  however  receive such special treatment. Th at raised an obvious 
question o f fairness.  It was not a theoretical question. From  colleagues at the UN, the United States  
underst ood that Bangladesh and Lao PDR could graduate as soon as 2026. Both Bangladesh and Lao 
PDR, as of 2019, already had a GNI per capita (measured on a PPP basi s) that had been  significantly 
higher than that of non -LDC Members, including Nigeria, Kyrgyz Republic, Pakistan, Kenya, 
Tajikistan, Cameroon, Congo, and Zimbabwe.  The United States asked whether t he LDCs had WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 27 - 
 
  consulted with th ose and other Members to discu ss th ose inequities . The proposal also raise d 
questions about the relationship between WTO rules and development. Some of the LDC -specific 
S&DT provisions that would be extended for twelve  years past graduation would  delay th ose 
Members ' implementation of WTO rules.  That would appear to suggest that such WTO rules were 
somehow in conflict with development.  Implementation of WTO rules foster ed development and that 
Graduating LDCs would not want to delay their implementation.  It would be he lpful for the LDC 
colleagues to explain their views on th at, including on whether they had  considered what a 
graduating LDC would do, and by when, to ensure that WTO rules were implemented in their trade 
regimes . The United States  looked forward to continu ing its careful study of th e proposal.  
5.31.   The representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia , on behalf of the Arab Group , underst ood 
the concer ns and challenges faced by the LDCs during the graduation process  due to various capacity 
constraints. The Arab Grou p was a strong supporter to better integrate LDCs in the multilateral 
trading system and was ready for further discussions towards a positive outcome in th at regard.  
5.32.   The representative of Nigeria  associate d with the statements of the African Group and the 
ACP Group , support ed the LDC proposal and call ed on the G eneral Council  to approve the proposal 
as it w ould go a long way to assist Graduating LDCs in addressing their development challenges.  
5.33.   The representative of  the European Union  under stood  fully th e challenges that LDCs faced in 
integrating in the global trading system.  While graduation was a positive and remarkable milestone 
to be celebrated, most graduated LDCs ha d not, at the time of their graduation, achieved the same 
level of capacity and integ ration in the global economy of most other developing countries. A smooth 
transition after graduation could  therefore be needed. There should be support and flexibilities for 
Members, commensurate with their needs and capacity constraints, beyond the group  of LDCs.  That 
was established in the European Union 's trade and cooperation policies that provide d support for 
LDCs, for countries that ha d recently graduated from the LDC Status as well as other developing 
countries. In the trade area specifically, the a im of the European Union was to focus on how to 
facilitate and enhance the capacity of countries to assume commitments that foster ed integration in 
the global economy. That was the best way that the WTO c ould effectively contribute to sustainable 
developme nt. In that spirit, the European Union w ould continue to support constructive initiatives 
to better integrate Members with capacity constraints into the multilateral trading system and to 
take into account in that connection the specific situation of graduating LDCs. The European Union  
especially encourage d discussions on the basis of analysis that show ed where spe cific difficulties 
existed. The European Union ha d previously put forward a number of questions on that proposal and 
would continue to assess the text. The European Union  looked forward to hearing the views of other 
Members and thank ed the LDC Group for its continued and constructive engagement in the matter.  
5.34.   The representative of Bangladesh  thank ed all Members  who ha d taken the floor and who had 
supported the LDC  submission. Bangladesh  was grateful to them and expect ed their continued 
support going forward . The issue raised by  the United States had already been adequately answered 
in its earlier intervention. Even then, Bangladesh  would engage with the U nited States  and other 
interested delegations to further clarify questions, if any. Bangladesh  urged the Chairman  to initiate 
an informal process so that Members  could engage meaningfully to advance negotiations in attaining 
a positive outcome on the matter soon. The LDCs ha d full confidence in his wisdom and leadership.  
5.35.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , echo ed the words of Bangladesh and 
reassured Members  that the LDC Group  remained  flexible and w ould continue its dialogue with them 
with the hope of arriving at a consensus -based decision.  
5.36.   The Chairman  noted that it  was the third time that Members  had discussed th e matter at the 
General Council. He hoped that all Members were  listening to each other carefully. While m ore time 
was needed to discuss the various aspects of the proposal, Members remained  willing to engage in 
those discussions , which was  positive. He again call ed on the LDC Group and all Members to continue 
to talk to each other in an effort to clarify questions or concerns, take suggestions on board and find 
a way forward that was acceptable to everyone. He remain ed available to assist in th at endeavour.  
5.37.   The General Council took note  of the Chairman's statement and of the other statements.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 28 - 
 
  6  SUPPORTING THE CONCLUSION OF FISHERIES SUBSIDIES NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE 
SUSTAINABILITY OF THE O CEAN AND FISHING COMMUNITIES – DRAFT MINISTERIAL 
DECISION - COMMUNICATION FROM BRAZIL (WT/GC/W/815)  
6.1.  The Chairman  recalled that the i tem was included in the agenda of the General Council for the 
second time by Brazil together with the communication in WT/GC /W/815.  
6.2.  The representative of Brazil  had requested the inclusion of th e item on the agenda to continue 
the discussion of Brazil's  proposed draft Ministerial Decision in support of the conclusion of fisheries 
subsidies negotiations , which had been  presented to Members at the last General Council meeting. 
As previously stated, in the context Members'  inability to meet the deadline set by SDG 14.6 to 
conclude the negotiations, the purpose of th e initiative was to signal to the international community  
that Members remain ed committed to fulfil their mandate and reach a meaningful agreement  – one 
that deliver ed the highest level of sustainability of the ocean and fishing communities while tackling 
fisheries subsidies.  
6.3.  Since the last General Council meeti ng, the pace of negotiations ha d been intense and had 
strongly benefited from the leadership and engagement of Dr Ngozi. More recently,  Brazil  had 
received with great enthusiasm her announcement of a possible Ministerial Meeting in July aimed at 
reviewing a very advanced, hopefully final, text. Brazil fully support ed Dr Ngozi's  initiative for a 
Ministerial Meeting in July. As Members  enter ed the final phase of the negotiations, it was even more 
important to renew their commitment in securing an agreement on  comprehensive and effective 
disciplines to curb subsidies that threaten ed global marine fish stocks. Members  could not afford to 
reduce the level of ambition at th at stage. They did not  need just any agreement, but one that truly 
change d the current pract ices of subsidization and contribute d to the sustainability of the ocean and 
fishing communities. It ha d been widely recognized that certain forms of fisheries subsidies were 
major contributors to overcapacity and a key driver of overfishing.  
6.4.  Each year, go vernments spe nt an estimated US D 22 billion on capacity -enhancing subsidies 
that artificially reduce d the cost of fishing and enable d fishers to travel farther or fish for longer than 
they would be able to without subsidies. By artificially lowering costs,  capacity -enhancing subsidies 
encourage d more fishing than stocks c ould support profitably and sustainably. Twenty years after 
the launch of negotiations, the percentage of fish stocks within biologically sustainable levels ha d 
dropped continuously. Accord ing to the FAO, more than one -third of fish stocks were currently  
overfished. Th e persistent deterioration of the health of the marine fish stocks ha d an important 
impact on the livelihoods of millions of people around the world  dependent on fishing resources.  
6.5.  Members  therefore ha d a crucial role to play in helping to revert th at global trend by tackling 
one of its main causes. As discussions on trade a nd environmental sustainability intensif ied at the 
WTO, it seem ed reasonable to call for the conclusion of a two -decade -old negotiation that particularly 
enhance d the positive relationship between trade rules and environmental objectives. Failure to 
delive r on th at goal w ould have a deep impact on the credibility of the WTO's negotiating pillar. 
Brazil's draft Ministerial Decision call ed for a much -needed political response from the WTO to the 
just aspirations of the international community. As Members  approached the UNGA and MC12, 
stakeholders w ould be expecting th e organization to deliver multilateral outcomes.  
6.6.  Brazil  reiterate d that its initiative d id not bring new elements to the negotiating table and it d id 
not seek to modify the already agreed upon man date. It aim ed solely at conveying a message on 
the WTO's commitment to reaching environmental sustainability objectives through fisheries 
subsidies disciplines. Brazil look ed forward to working constructively with Members at th e final phase 
of the negotia tions and hope d that Members  could find the appropriate landing zones in order to 
conclude the agreement as soon as possible.  
6.7.  The representative of the Philippines  was encouraged by the momentum and positive 
engagement in the April cluster of fisheries neg otiations . The Philippines found Brazil's proposal 
particularly useful in light of the upcoming virtual Ministerial Meeting in July as envisioned by 
Dr. Ngozi . The proposal stresse d the kind of MC12 deliverable and the level of ambition that Members 
should be aiming for. Focus on curbing harmful subsidies should be the WTO 's contribution to SDG 
14.6. The Philippines stressed the need  to be mindful of the mandate and exercise restrain t and 
prudence  to facilitate consensus  building . Members  needed to act together for an ambitious and 
pragmatic outcome. The Philippines therefore look ed forward to the release of the next Chair's Text WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 29 - 
 
  on 11 May and to the  urgent action and collaboration wi th Brazil and other Members  in coordination 
with the NGR Chair, Dr Ngozi  and the Ministers in July . 
6.8.  The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , welcomed the continued commitment of 
Members to conclude the fisheries negotiations no later than MC12 to  fulfil expectations under SDG 
14.6 and the WTO mandate for those negotiations. LDCs were actively engaged in negotiations that 
were strictly text based and hoped that Members would find common ground in areas that would 
enable them to achieve a positive o utcome. Those negotiations should result in rules which did not 
transform the WTO, de facto or de jure, into a fisheries management organization, but rather which 
covered what Members could do under the aegis of the WTO. That meant not resorting solely to the 
WTO when it came to that very important issue. The negotiations should focus on the discipline of 
large-scale industrial fisheries subsidies that contributed to overcapacity and overfishing.  
6.9.  The representative of Nigeria  associate d with the statements of the African Group and the ACP  
Group . Nigeria reemphasi zed its readiness to support the early conclusion of the fisheries subsidies ' 
negotiations , due to its importance . Members should  limit their ambition and keep them in  line with  
SDG 14.6 and the Ministers ' mandate that require d the prohibition and elimination of subsidies which 
contribute d to overfishing, overcapacity and IUU fishing. Members ha d already missed the 2020 
timeline to deliver on SDG 14.6 and ha d no option than to wor k hard with a view to ensuring that 
they achieve d outcomes by or before MC12 – if possible in July – so that Ministers w ould only come 
to MC12 to adopt the text.  Nigeria  urged Members to  avoid the insertion of wordings or issues that 
reflect ed fisheries ma nagement obligations to the WTO , as that approach ha d proven in the past to 
be ineffective in addressing global overcapacity and overfishing problems, focus on main issues ; and 
exhibit flexibilities to reach convergence in all areas where  differences still  existed; and enforce  
Members ' commitment to ensur e the conclusion of the negotiations as soon as possible.  
6.10.   The representative of Barbados  associated with the statements of  CARICOM and the ACP 
Group . As a small and developing State, the sustainability of Barbados' ocean and fishing community 
was of core importance to its development and people and the earth itself. Barbados  was therefore 
pleased to be able to contribute to the discussion s on the matter. Barbados  continue d to be 
concerned with the state of the global fisheries stocks and more systemically the oceans  – one of 
the main reasons for its long-standing commitments and participation in the deliberations and the 
Negotiation Group on Rules on fisheries subsidies. Barbados was guided by SDG 14.6 and the 
mandates of the Ministers in past Ministerial Conferences  and stressed that those mandates allow ed 
Members  to continue their work and pursuit of outcomes  in that area . In fulfilling their  mandate on 
fisheries subsidies, Membe rs should  target  major subsidizers and large-scale industrial fishing while 
allowing adequate policy space for developing and LDC Members  that ha d underdeveloped fishing 
industry and that d id not contribute to the problem of overfishing and overcapacity. Barbados  would 
not be in a position to accept provisions which d id not adequately take th at and other factors into 
account and which  used per capita income as an indicator defining Members' ability t o access S&DT . 
6.11.   The representative of Cameroon  associated with the statement of the ACP  Group , welcomed 
the interest in the draft and hoped that it would lead to the conclusion of the fisheries negotiations. 
Like many Members, Cameroon wished to see the conclusion of the negotiations on the prohibition 
of fisheries subsidies by MC12. The mandate of those negotiations concerned precisely the 
prohibition of fisheries subsidies, and effective and operational S&DT. For decades, Members had 
undertaken to sustainably manage thei r fisheries resources in accordance with the United Nations 
Convention on the Law of the Sea and other instruments. Various manuals, guides and agreements 
on sustainable fisheries management had been adopted yet had not reduced the appetite of some 
parties  for continuing to expand and broaden their capacities , which largely surpassed the resources 
available in their waters and which resulted in overfishing. The WTO had therefore been called on to 
curb those subsidies.  
6.12.   Nations like Cameroon saw hundreds of v essels pass through their waters, vessels that fished 
illegally, evaded the surveillance systems from their coasts, were sometimes stopped and penalized, 
and then immediately returned to fish, as the penalty incurred was far less than the profits obtained.  
The profits made from illegal industrial fishing in world trade were estimated at around USD 20 
billion , which was higher than Cameroon's annual budget. Cameroon's small-scale fishers, those 
using dugout canoes, who struggled to feed their families and co mmunities, and who had limited 
resources, had to navigate further and further out to catch fish, which were then sold on the local 
market. Their seas were drying up and they were aware of the urgent need to increase their means 
of surveillance to dissuade foreign industrial vessels from entering their waters, to give their small -WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 30 - 
 
  scale fishers a chance, and to rationally manage their resources. Members should also assist their 
small -scale fishers in acquiring appropriate navigation tools. Cameroon however ha d scarce 
resources and many needs. Furthermore, in light of the large subsidies granted by other Members  
for their industrial fisheries, under the guise of programmes with uncertain sustainability outcomes, 
there were fears that their efforts, whatever the y were, would not bear fruit.  
6.13.   Cameroon was being asked to tell, in the future, small scale fishers who would have received 
a subsidy of USD 100 to acquire an outboard motor and adapt their nets to meet standards, that 
they should fish exclusively in the wa ters with the lowest fish stock in the territorial sea. If not, they 
would be subject to the same rules as the industrial vessels that received thousands of dollars in 
subsidies and fished illegally in their country's exclusive economic zone, which such ve ssels were 
prohibited from entering. And when, months or even years later, fishers were confronted once again 
with such industrial vessels that had already been found guilty of illegal, unreported and unregulated 
fishing, and wished to know whether the ves sels returned the subsidies granted by their States, or 
what sanctions had been taken against them by those States, Cameroon would tell them that the 
States in question were not bound by time limits to fulfil their obligations to eliminate subsidies.  
6.14.   Moreo ver, Members would have created a new level of jurisdiction, where, in addition to being 
informed of the actions initiated against its industrial vessels by the coastal State for the purpose of 
monitoring the regularity of procedures and exercising its rig ht to consular protection, the flag State, 
which was usually the State granting the subsidy, would be able to question, a posteriori , the 
conformity of a procedure with the WTO, even if it had not made such a claim during the course of 
the actions that had  led to the decision. It would thus be both judge and jury. Those assumptions 
were not taken from the scenario of a Netflix film, but from the provisions of the current and highly 
lauded text on fisheries subsidies which Members were being asked to adopt a nd which legitimi zed 
subsidies for industrial fisheries and criminali zed artisanal and small-scale fisheries.  
6.15.   Members  had the sovereign right to support their economies.  Cameroon  had however been 
following with interest the new fisheries support measures o f certain Members. Cameroon asked 
whether those subsidies would increase or reduce the overcapacity and overfishing observed in the 
seas. Cameroon was working constructively with all Members  to conclude, as soon as possible and 
without delay, an agreement in line with the mandate. Such an agreement should  take into account 
the realities on the ground, avoid increasing the burden on artisanal and small scale fishing 
operators, effectively pena lize illegal fishing, encourage some sustainable fisheries subsidies, and 
give developing countries , which were not the problem, appropriate and effective S&DT . Cameroon  
was confident that, together, Members  could achieve th at. 
6.16.   The representative of Jamaic a, on behalf of the ACP , reiterate d its statement made at the 
General Council meeting in March on th e issue. The ACP Group ha d always valued the sustainability 
of the oceans.  An outcome should be an effective policy tool in the global fight against IUU fis hing 
and global fish stock depletion. As  Members, they should always be mindful that the WTO 's 
competence in th e area was limited to subsidies and, to the extent possible, collaboration with other 
international organizations that ha d mandates in oceans and  fisheries management.  Members'  focus 
and priority should therefore be to conclude the negotiations through the NGR process. They already 
had a Ministerial mandate , which w as sufficient to guide work in the negotiations. The Ministerial 
mandate was also in  line with SDG 14.6. The ACP Group reaffirm ed its commitment to the 
implementation of SDG  14.6 and the MC11 mandate. The focus of Members'  engagements should 
be on major subsidizers and large -scale industrial fishing. They should  ensure that the outcome 
provide d adequate policy space for developing and LDC  Members  to develop their fisheries sector. 
The ACP Group c ould not live with transitio n periods alone with out technical assistance and capacity 
building. An outcome should  ensure that sovereign rights of Members were respected, national 
judicial processes were unfettered, implementation was not more burdensome than necessary to 
achieve the sustainability objective, the provisions remain ed within the competence of the WTO and 
that there was policy space for small scale and artisanal fishing. The negotiations should be 
concluded in 2021 and the ACP Group  would work towards making that a realit y – but flexibility, 
empathy and compromise from all parties were key ingredients to getting th at done.  
6.17.   The representative of Kenya  associated with the statements of the ACP Group and the African 
Group . In 2015, the international community under the auspic es of the U N General Assembly and 
the S DGs had committed to eliminate certain forms of fisheries subsidies by 2020. Th e deadline had 
been missed despite efforts made . The fisheries negotiations were at a critical stage necessitating 
Members to exercise mor e flexibility to move the process to the next level as they progress ed and WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 31 - 
 
  looked for ways to reach consensus on the few diverging areas . They should take into account  the 
complexity of th e matter  and its political sensitivities . As time was running out  and as Members  
could not afford to carry on th at subject beyond MC12,  they should strive  for a final or at the very 
least an advanced text that Ministers c ould consider in advance of MC12. Kenya  therefore support ed 
Dr Ngozi 's roadmap for a July package. Members  had an opportunity to demonstrate to the world 
that the multilateral trading system was still alive and relevant i ncluding in the context of the SDGs.  
6.18.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the Pacific Group , reiterate d its statement at the 
previous General Council meeting  and associated  with the statement of the ACP . The Pacific Group  
recogni zed the urgency to complete th e negotiation s – which was a top priority – and took notes of 
the July deadline for concluding the negotiations announced by Dr Ngozi . The Pacific Group  looked 
forward to the revised text that w ould be presented the following week  and was committed to 
delivering a meaningful outcome on fisheries subsidies at MC12. Th e agreement should  focus on 
disabling harmful subsidies and not fisheries management , provide policy space for small developing 
Members especially small island developing States that had little to no fishing capacity at present, 
provide security for small scale and artisanal sectors and should not undermine Members' rights 
under UNCLOS to offer access to EEZ on terms they decided . 
6.19.   The representative of Saint Lucia , on behalf of CARICOM , associated with the statement of  
the ACP  and reiterate d that Members  had already  had a negotiating mandate at  MC11  in line with 
SDG 14.6 . CARICOM  needed to better understand the objective of Brazil's  proposed declaratio n. 
CARICOM remain ed committed to the original mandate and reiterate d that targeting big subsidizer s 
and large scale industrial fishing should be the main priority of the negotiation s while ensuring 
appropriate and effective S&DT  for developing countries that t ook into account the unique 
circumstances of small island developing States. CARICOM look ed forward to more dedicated 
discussions among Members on the de minimis exemption for those Members whose total global 
catches were under 2%. CARICOM  called for th ose discussions to be conducted with constructive 
engagement and with the view to finding solu tions. CARICOM  could not afford an outcome on  S&DT 
that was based on  the per capita income criteria. CARICOM remain ed committed to engage 
constructively in th ose negotiations  and urged all Members to work towards a successful outcome 
that could be present ed to Ministers , and by extension the international community , by MC12.  
6.20.   The representative of the Russian Federation  share d the objective  of reach ing a meaningful 
outcome  on fisheries subsidies  by MC12  and reiterated its statement on the issue at the previo us 
General Council meeting. The Russian Federation  welcome d the negotiating process which had been 
achieved largely due to Dr Ngozi's  engagement with Members.  Members  should do their best to 
reach a consensual agreement on core issues and stabili ze their common understanding at the 
Ministerial Meeting in July , so that the autumn period w ould be dedicated to finali sing the technical 
issues. On substance, the Russian Federation  was comm itted to fulfil ling the mandate while ensuring  
the sustainable economic development of Members' fisheries sectors. Now was the moment of truth  
when all Members should honestly admit to themselves how they w ould ensure full implementation 
of the disciplines . The agreement should  stimulate sustainable exploitation of resources and should 
not contain indefinite exemptions for some Members or some types of fishing. The greatest threat 
to the negotiations was the maintenance of unrealistic requests . Constructive  engagement from all 
Members  would ensure the resolution of core issues that  the negotiations face d. Members  should 
keep in mind that the eventual fisheries subsidies agreement should  not be counterbalanced by 
gains from other WTO negotiating tracks that w ould make it tough to convinc e capitals to accept the 
result of their work.  
6.21.   The representative of Mauritius , on behalf of the African Group , referred to  her delegation's  
statement at the previous  General Council meeting . The African Group remain ed committed to a 
balanced outcome on fisheries subsidies at MC12. An outcome that would be based on the principle 
of sustainability  and would  discipline subsidies that contribute d to overcapacity , overfishing  and IUU 
fishing. The provision of effective S&DT  for developing and LDC  Members should be an integral part  
of the agreement . Members'  focus should be on finding convergence on all the issues especially 
given the recent encouraging developments and the decision to move discussions to higher levels. 
In so doing, they should ensure that the provisions remain ed within the competence of the WTO.  
6.22.   The representative of the United States  remain ed committed to a constructive engagement 
in the WTO fisheries subsidies negotiations and to developing a meaningful agr eement. Th at mean t 
an agreement that discipline d the most harmful fisheries subsidies to protect the environment and 
the sustainability of the oceans and fisheries resources, and that ha d a meaningful connection to the WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 32 - 
 
  lives of the fishers and workers. Members therefore need ed effective disciplines on subsidies that 
contribute d to IUU fishing, overfished stocks and overfishing and overcapacity with limited or no 
exceptions. Th at include d additional, focused prohibitions on subsidies contingent on fishing beyond 
national jurisdiction and subsidies for vessels that d id not fly the  flag of the subsidizing Member.  A 
meaningful agreement should  also consider the ways in which harmful fisheries subsidies impact ed 
their fishers and workers. As it had indicated during the recent cluster, the United States intend ed 
to explore how effectiv e disciplines c ould contribute to Members ' efforts to combat forced labo ur on 
fishing vessels and w ould soon put forward ideas in th at area. The United States  recognize d that its 
aim was to successfully conclude the negotiations by MC12 or sooner and it support ed that objective. 
That would require Members to put aside calls for exclusions and additional flexibilities, and focus 
on agreeing to disciplines that would actually improve the status quo and would have a positive 
impact not just on the sustainabili ty of fisheries resources but on the lives of fishers and workers.  
6.23.   The representative of South Africa  was guided by the MC11  mandate and SDG 14.6 in the 
fisheries negotiations.  South Africa  was concerned that the proposed draft Ministerial Decision 
seem ed to reinte rpret the mandate in ways it did not find helpful and ma de no reference to S&D T – 
a critical element of the mandate. In view of the mandate 's sustainability objectives,  the principle of 
common but differentiated responsibility should underpin the negotiations. As it had previously 
pointed ou t, the mandate was to prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies which contribute d to 
overcapacity and overfishing, and to elimina te subsidies that contribute d to IUU fishing. Given the 
substantial amount of work to be completed for  the fisheries subs idies negotiations, South Africa  did 
not see how work on a draft decision w ould assist Members  in completing the outstanding work. 
Dr Ngozi wanted an accelerated outcome on fisheries subsidies by July  – a very optimistic timeframe . 
If Members  were to achieve it, they could not be diverted by additional discussions that d id not 
contribute to such an outcome. South Africa reiterate d its vie w that, notwithstanding the good 
intentions of the proposed Draft Ministerial Declaration by Brazil, Members'  time would be best 
served prioriti sing the conclusion of the current fisheries negotiations. The NGR Chair had indicated 
in his TNC report that he  intend ed to issue a revised text . Members would do well to focus on th at 
process without any further diversions. South Africa  share d the sentiments communicated by Brazil 
that all Members  should commit towards the successful conclusion of th ose negotiatio ns. 
6.24.   The representative of Bangladesh  associated with the statement of the LDC Group. It was 
imperative to have consensus on fisheries subsidies before MC12. M embers already  had a clear 
negotiating mandate on that area.  Subsidy was a WTO issue and fisheries were a common good . 
Members  therefore ha d a clear responsibility  on the matter . The genesis of  the fisheries subsidies 
negotiation s could be found in the  Doha Ministerial Declaration and the importance of the sector for  
developi ng and LDC Members  as had been demonstrated at the 2005 Hong Kong Ministerial 
Conference . Members should therefore  consider  the development priorities, poverty reduction and 
food security concerns of Members  in any outcome in that area . SDG 14.6 was not so mething new 
nor was the Hong Kong mandate  and th e mandate to conclude th e negotiation . Bangladesh thanked  
Ambassador Santiago Wills for his hard work in facilitating the discussions on the text. Time was not 
on their side. Members should  redouble their efforts to reach consensus.  Bangladesh reassured 
Members of its  constructive engage ment to reach consensus on th ose negotiation s before MC12.  
6.25.   The representative of Angola  support ed Brazil 's proposal that call ed on Members to conclude 
negotiations on fish eries subsidies to contribute to the sustainability of the oceans and fishing 
communities. Angola  express ed its concern to some of the positions that were dividing Members on 
important issues after a long period of negotiations  and called on everyone to redo uble their efforts 
to reach the desired agreement as soon as possible. It was in everyone's interest to have a healthy 
future for the oceans . The most effective way to achieve th at goal was the elimination of harmful 
subsidies. Members need ed to reach cons ensus based on fair, sustainable and inclusive proposals 
which w ould bring them more concrete commitments  and reach their objectives . 
6.26.   The representative of India remain ed committed to the negotiations on fisheries subsidies as 
provided under SDG 14.6 and the MC11 mandate. India was  slightly puzzled on whether  the purpose 
of the draft declaration was to have  an add -on to the process in the NGR which was accelerated with  
Dr Ngozi's  help or was it a fall back arrangement that if the negotiations  failed to meet the deadline 
then Members  were expecting th at kind of declaration  at MC12 . India suggest ed to be optimistic and 
try to follow the path of Dr Ngozi  and Ambassador Wills  to conclude the neg otiations. If Members  
were taking it as a fallback arrangement , then India share d the concern regarding the lack of explicit 
reference to S&DT . In the previous  General Council meeting, India had highlighted and had sought 
clarifications on some of the phra ses used in th e communication such as an ambitious outcome, WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 33 - 
 
  improv ing existing WTO disciplines in trade subsidies and upholding highest standards of 
environmental sustainability. India hoped to receive some clarifications on the tone used in th at 
communica tion. In the name of collective responsibility, it was disconcerting that the communication 
put no or very few industrial fishing fleets in countries that ha d highly developed industrialized fishing 
fleets.  Environmental sustainability of fisheries resourc es was a classic case for the application of 
the principle of common and differentiated responsibility  while e nsuring that the sustainability of the 
oceans remained  a shared responsibility . The livelihood of vulnerable fishermen across the globe 
depend ed on an appropriate and effective S&DT for developing and LDC Members  addressing their 
developmental priorities and concerns of food and livelihood  security.  
6.27.   The representative of Indonesia  reiterate d its commitment to finali ze the negotiations  the 
soones t and was  fully committed to ensure that the fisheries discipline would be  effective in 
addressing harmful subsidies  that contributed to overcapacity and overfishing and in protecting the 
artisanal and small -scale fisheries.  There were many aspects o f the proposal that need ed to be 
looked at further and negotiate d to reflect Members' divergent views on the fisheries subsidies 
negotiation s. The proposal could have a significant effect to the mandate that Members  already ha d. 
Indonesia  also question ed whether it was in Members'  best interest to negotiate different documents 
concerning fisheries subsidies aside from the negotiat ing text itself at th at point in time. 
6.28.   The representative of the European Union  said that t he negotiations was a determinant for 
the credibility of the WTO and the whole SDG agenda. The mandate that Members  had, both SDG 
14.6 and the MC11  mandate , was clear . Members  should address certain forms of harmful subsidies 
leading to overfishing and overcapacity and I UU fishing, while ensuring appropriate and effective 
S&DT . The mandate was addressed to all of Members. I t was not a mandate only for a certain 
category of Members – the largest subsidi zers or fleets , large-scale industrial fishing  – but for all 
WTO Members. Their mandate d id not introduce concepts like "polluter pays ". And th at was because 
ensuring healthy oceans and sustainable fish stocks was a responsibility of all  of them . The only way 
to address food security and growing the fisheries sector in the future was by ensuring that fishing 
was sustainable. Members  were already late and indeed on borrowed time. The European Union fully 
support ed the NGR Chair's and Dr Ngozi's  efforts and ambition to have an outcome in July.  
6.29.   The representative of Morocco  was in favour of a significant balanced and fair outcome to 
ensure the reestablishment of marine ecological balance and the preservation of fisheries resources 
for future generations. Morocco ha d presented its proposal charact erizing industrial and large -scale 
vessels which receive d the bulk of subsidies and contribute d for the most part to overfishing. Th at 
proposal would affect a quarter of its national fleet but nonetheless Morocco had taken  the bold step 
of seeking through that proposal to target those vessels as responsible for exhaustion of fisheries 
resources for the most part. Morocco remain ed committed to cooperating with all Members  to 
achieve an appropriate outcome through  the negotiating mandate while respecting the ir food 
security and soc ioeconomic development.  
6.30.   The representative of Pakistan  was hopeful for the conclusion of the ongoing fisheries 
negotiations.  Fisheries subsidies was one of the most important elements of WTO negotiations 
carried over from the Doha Ag enda.  Pakistan would  welcome discussions on other elements as well. 
On the proposal itself, it was hard to understand its motivation. The proposal was a draft Ministerial 
Decision to be agreed at MC12 aiming for a high standard of environmental sustainabil ity in 
concluding the discussions. Pakistan asked whether that would i mply that Members  were not seeking 
a conclusion at MC12 . The document also affirm ed a commitment to SDG 14.6 , but the language of 
the draft decision reduce d the mandate to only a higher standard of environmental sustainability. It 
did not mention the most crucial aspect of S&DT  which was the core of SDG 14.6. While ensuring 
environmental sustainability was a much -needed objective, all Members  had a responsibility to their 
people to allow them the opportunities for sustainable livelihoods as well.  While considering 
sustainability, Members  should  address all aspects of sustainable development to make it truly 
meaningful. Pakistan was not yet convinced of the usefulness of th e proposed decision at th at time. 
6.31.   The representative of Brazil  thanked all Members  for the ir constructive criticism and the 
analysis of the text. Brazil was  ready to discuss with anyone interested in the  scope of its proposal. 
It was time for Members  to underst and that food and livelihood  security  require d an ambitious 
agreement. Members  could not afford to have  an agreement that was not meaningful, was full of 
carve outs  and that preserve d the current status quo  because what was at stake in the long run was 
food secu rity and the livelihood of the fishermen and the livelihood of people  who depend ed on 
fisheries resources . An ambitious agreement was not an agreement to the detriment of the livelihood WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 34 - 
 
  of anyone . On the  contrary, to save the oceans was to save people's livelihood and fishing 
communities . That was why Members  needed an ambitious agreement . That was the only way to 
understand sustainability. Sustainability was not to the detriment of development of higher levels of 
wellbeing . Sustainability was an integral part of all of those . 
6.32.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
7  WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE AND MORATORIUM ON IMPOSING 
CUSTOMS DUTIES ON ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSIONS – REQUEST FROM INDIA  
7.1.  The Chairman  recalled that  India had requested that the item concerning the Work Programme  
on Electronic Commerce and Moratorium on Imposing Customs Duties on Electronic Transmissions 
be included in the agenda of t hat day's meeting. Th e item had also been included on the agenda of 
the March meeting, and the previous ones in October and December 2020.  
7.2.  The representative of India thanked the Chair for engaging the Members on th at subject  
through  bilateral consultations and for organizing an Informal Open-ended General Council Meeting 
on th at subject on 29 April. The digital revolution was still unfolding, and the digital infrastructure , 
while it ha d played its role during the ongoing pandemic , had brought out the early , existing and 
widening digital divide am ong Members , which had been  further exposed during the COVID -19 crisis. 
Members  fully comprehend ed the implications of e -commerce on competition and market structure, 
issues related to transfer of technology, data storage, automation and its impact on trad itional jobs 
and the gaps in e -commerce policy and regulation framework , particularly in developing countries. 
That was why India ha d been a proponent of strengthening the multilateral work under the non -
negotiating and exploratory 1998 Work Programme on E lectronic C ommerce. Under th e multilateral 
work programme, with the intention of better understanding the implications of the moratorium on 
customs duties on electronic transmissions, India along with South Africa ha d introduced 
submissions which explain ed their understanding of the scope and the impact of the moratorium. In 
December 2019, Members could  recall that India had joined the consensus for a six -month extension 
of the moratorium , with an understanding that th e Work Programme w ould be reinvigorated with 
the objective of achieving clarity on various issues , including the scope of the moratorium and its 
impact on Members' policy space and revenue.  
7.3.  Since then, due to the repeated postponement of MC12 , the Moratori um ha d been extended 
by about two years – much beyond the six months agreed to in December 2019. During the months 
leading up to MC12 , Members should  constructively engage on various issues of the Work 
Programme and have an understanding of the scope , definition and impact of the Moratorium  to 
enable them to make an informed decision on its extension , or otherwise at MC12 . Multilateralism 
was vital in a world facing development challenges and through constructive discussions under the 
multilaterally mandate d Work Programme. The WTO ha d a unique opportunity to contribute towards 
an inclusive and development -oriented approach to e -commerce. India along with South Africa ha d 
also circulated a paper  in document  WT/GC/W/812 , seeking the General Council to conduct 
discussions under the Work Programme. Paragraph 1.2 of the Work Programme provide d that th e 
General Council  should play a central role and keep the Work Programme under continuous review 
by placing it as a  standing i tem on its agenda. Since  Members  were not able to do that, India was 
forced to introduce th at subject through request that such item be added in every  General Council  
agenda. India accordingly urge d Members  to ensure that the Work Programme was kept as a 
standing agenda item for meetings of th e General  Council to ensure that th e Council  took up 
considerations of various trade -related issues of crosscutting nature including the imposition of 
customs duties on electronic transmissions.  
7.4.  Members  also need ed to ensure that, as mandated in Paragraph s 2 to 5 of the Work 
Programme, the relevant WTO bodies engage d constructively and report ed to the General  Council 
on issues assigned to them under the Work Programme including on the issue of challenges to 
enhance participation of developing countries , in e-commerce in particular , as exporters of 
electronically delivered products, the role of improved access to infrastructure and transfer of 
technology and movement of natural persons , the use of information technology in the integration 
of developing countries in the multilateral trading system, the implications for developing countries 
of the possible impact of e -commerce on the traditional means of distribution of physical goods , and 
the financial implicati ons of electronic commerce for developing countries. India was working with 
like-minded Members to introduce submissions in all the relevant WTO bodies to engage in WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 35 - 
 
  constructive discussions on a non -negotiating basis. India urged Members to constructively engage 
in discussions on the  Work Programme in th e General  Council and in other relevant WTO bodies.  
7.5.  The representative of the Philippines  said that e -commerce play ed a critical role in the global 
pandemic recovery to boost economic growth , making it vital  to maintain a stable and predictable 
digital trading environment , not only for big businesses but also for MSMEs. In line with th at and as 
agreed in the December 2019 General Council Decision , the Philippines reiterate d its commitment 
to reinvigorate work  under the Work Programme on Electronic C ommerce and express ed its support 
to the current practice of not imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions until the next 
Ministerial Conference. The Philippines  hoped that, until the Ministerial Conference , there would be  
positive development in th at regard. The Philippines  welcome d continuous discussion on the Work 
Programme and the moratorium and was open to engage in constructive discussions in the relevant 
WTO bodies mandated under the Work Programme. Work on e -commerce overall c ould be pursued 
in parallel in the proposed structured discussions as well as in the Joint Statement Initiative on 
Electronic C ommerce. Discussions in the JSI complement ed the proposed structured discussion s on 
the Work Programme by reflect ing Members' e-commerce priorities.  The Philippines st ood ready to 
work constructively with Members on th at important issue , to deliver a possible Ministerial Decision 
on e-commerce at MC12.  
7.6.  The representative of the Republi c of Korea  reiterate d its strong support for permanently 
extending the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions. Even before the pandemic , 
the revenue implication of allowing the Moratorium to lapse ha d been called into question by the 
OECD and others. The COVI D-19 situation ha d made the case for its permanence even stronger. 
The advantages of duty -free digital trade ha d never been more clearly felt than they ha d in that 
increasingly contactless era. On a personal note, as she would soon be departing, she recall ed that 
the schedule for MC12 had first been decided in the July General Council meeting in 2018 . That had 
been her first General Council meeting. Members ha d agreed at that meeting to hold MC12 in June 
2020. They all kn ew what ha d happened in  those  three years. While she would  not be in Geneva  to 
participate at  MC12 in person and while the case for pessimism could  be strong, she would 
nonetheless  return to Korea with a sense of optimism. She was  hopeful because she believe d in the 
professionalism and dedic ation of her fellow colleagues. She knew Members  would not settle for 
failure . She trusted them and D r Ngozi to work towards a successful MC12 – one that would  reform 
the WTO  by strengthen ing its core functions  and mak ing it more relevant, responsive and efficient. 
The WTO  would  always have a cherished place in her heart. She assured Members of her continued  
strong support for multilateralism and the rules -based multilateral trading  system.  
7.7.  The representative of Nigeria  said that the need for the WTO to deliver outcomes that w ould 
underpin the growth and development of global digital trade a nd address issues undermining the 
gains of developing countries from the sector , could not be overemphasi zed. Nigeria  had been 
consiste nt in calling for the Membership to reinvigorate the Work Programme and explore ways of 
addressing the difficulties undermining the gains of developing countries from global digital trade. 
Nigeria  had co-sponsored the Australian -led proposal on exploratory  discussions on supporting 
digital capability of business and consumers in the CTS which was gaining traction with more 
Members engaging in the discussions. Nigeria support ed having more structured and targeted 
discussions on horizontal and vertical issues  on trade -related aspect s of e-commerce under the Work 
Programme to set an inclusive and development -oriented agenda for Ministers ' consideration at 
MC12. Such discussions should clarify the scope , among others , and address classification issues.  
7.8.  Regarding the moratorium, Nigeria  support ed the call for broad based discussions on scope 
and definition to gain greater insight and deepen understanding of th ose issues. Nigeria  was also 
mindful of the legitimate concerns o f some Members on the effect of the Moratorium on fiscal 
revenue. Nigeria therefore  support ed the call by some Members for the four designated bodies under 
the Work Programme to delve deeper into the benefits and costs of the Moratorium , especially for 
developing countries. Such assessment should not however only focus on the static effects but also 
on the dynamic effects so Members  could be properly guided. Digital trade ha d become the engine 
of economic transformation in Nigeria  and had set the country on  a new growth trajectory. An 
objective assessment of the impact of the Moratorium on economies w ould reveal that the benefits 
associated with the dynamic effects of the Moratorium outweigh ed the revenue loss. Members  should 
also consider the negative effec ts of an unpredictable global e -commerce environment for businesses 
and consumers that would  likely occur from the non -renewal of the moratorium at MC12. In  that 
regard , Nigeria support ed the temporary extension of the moratorium at MC12.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 36 - 
 
  7.9.  The representative of Indonesia  said that Members should  bear in mind that the ir objective 
should be  to conclude their work on the 1998 Work Programme on Electronic C ommerce , particularly 
on the issue of the scope and definition of electronic transmissions  and the fiscal implication s arising 
from the Moratorium. Indonesia dr ew attention to the General Council Decision o f 10 December  2019 
where Members had agreed to re invigorate  the multilateral work under the Work Programme , as 
agreed and mandated in 1998. Considering the unfolding and rapid development o f e-commerce in 
the digital era, the multilaterally mandated work ha d never been more important  than now . Members 
fully comprehend ed the complexity and many aspects related to e -commerce and the relation to 
their social developmental processes. There were serious asymmetries in  global e -commerce 
currently being dominated by a handful of companies that ha d made billions of dollars of profit during 
the pandemic. Th ose asymmetries should  be addressed in considering  the Moratorium to ensure a 
level playing field which allowed  developing countries to promote their digital industrialization 
policies.  
7.10.   The global benefit from e -commerce should  be accessible to people within and across 
countrie s. Indonesia fully support ed the accelerat ion of  work under the Work Programme so that 
Members c ould decide whether to extend the moratorium at the MC12. Indonesia  support ed the 
submission presented by India and South Africa on reinvigorating the Work Programme  and shared 
their view  that the multilateral work to clarify the scope, definition and impact  of customs duties on 
electronic transmission should be completed before MC12 to enable Minister s to decide on the issue 
one way or another. The fact that som e Members had attempted to advance an ambitious agenda 
on digital trade negotiations through other mechanism s should not hinder the continuation of the 
work under the Work Programme and degrade the relevance of th at mandate. Indonesia reiterate d 
that its p osition on the moratorium remain ed unchanged. Indonesia urge d Members to serious ly 
commit and concrete ly contribut e to advance the mandated work under the 1998 Wo rk Programme . 
7.11.   The representative of Pakistan  reiterate d that,  on the Work Programme, the General Council 
should  fulfil its mandate to reinvigorate the structured discussions on various aspects of electronic 
commerce. Th at should  be done with a view to find ing solutions for developing Members ' 
fundamental problems , such as the dig ital divide , to be placed  in a flexible framework that would 
allow them to catch up with the rest of the world. Such structured discussions should  be carried o ut 
within the various Councils and Committees mandated to do so on relevant aspects. Pakistan  urged 
the Membership to engage in earnest and meaningfully in th ose discussions.  The Moratorium ha d 
been discuss ed for some time now. Pakistan  had been consistent in its view that new technological 
developments and emerging realities mean t Members  had to take a step back and reassess the 
situation. That was probably why the moratorium's extension ha d always been temporary.  
7.12.   Rapidly evolving technologies in the digital age, while becoming great enablers, were also a 
reminder of how far behind developing countries were in modern digital times. At the same time, 
such developing countries, most often constrained financially, and at the same time seeking to 
advance sustainable development through modern technologies, c ould not ignore serious revenue 
and industrial implications for their economies. Th ose implications ha d become more evident from 
latest research on artificial intelligence, 3 -D printing and growth of the digital industry.  The removal 
of the Moratorium would  not automatically translate to impos ing duties . It would only allow Members 
the right to do so however much and whichever electronic transmission they deem ed approp riate. 
Any decision on the continuation of the Moratorium c ould not be straightforward and should  consider 
all aspects for developing countries on their own merit without linking it with any other issue.  
7.13.   The representative of Australia  said that t he idea t hat Members  would let the moratorium 
expire in the year where digital trade ha d blossomed was a bit strange. As it had stated previously , 
including at the Informal  Open-ended meeting, Australia continue d to support making the 
Moratorium permanent. It was a critical part of the modern trading system , providing business es 
better access to markets and consumers more choice. Letting the moratorium expire would 
encourage restrictions on digital trade , which would be the last thing Members  needed at that time, 
given the crucial role digital trade was playing in the global economy and w ould play in efforts to 
promote recovery. Australia was  also committed to revitali sing the Work Program me as envisaged 
in the December 2019 decision as it had demonstrated.  
7.14.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the Pacific Group , support ed the reinvigoration  of 
the Work Programme – an important platform to help address the digital divide faced by small 
economies. The Pacific Group suppor ted the continuation of the Work Programme as agreed by the 
General Council in December 2019 , including  by having s tructured discussion s on the Work WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 37 - 
 
  Programme and the  impact  of the Moratorium.  The Pacific Group support ed the call for the Chairman 
to establish  a process for structured discussions on those  issues in the lead up to  MC12.  
7.15.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  was pleased that , at the recent Informal Open-ended 
meeting on the Work Programme convened by the  Chairman, Members ha d reaffirmed the ir 
collective interest and willingness to engage in constructive discussion s following the G eneral Council  
Decision made in December 2019 in document WT/L/1079. Chinese Taipei  continue d to support the 
sharing of best practices, experience s and information among M embers , in the relevant WTO 
Committees , to advance the Work Programme.  On the M oratorium, it ha d been proven that the 
practice of not imposing tariffs  on cross -border electronic transmissions ha d significantly supported 
the growth of the ICT sector and had assisted SMEs and MSMEs to integrate into global trade. At 
that critical time when Members  were facing the pandemic situation, th at practice w ould ensure a 
stable and predictable trading environ ment and provide businesses and consumers with more 
choices at lower cost. While Chinese Taipei  support ed a decision at MC12 to extend the moratorium 
until MC13, Chinese Taipei  called on Members to consider strengthening the existing multilateral 
commitmen ts to make the moratorium permanent.  
7.16.   The representative of Nepal  noted that e -commerce ha d been an important agenda item since 
1998 with the  Work Programme  being established at MC2 . The Work Programme had been  expected 
to take into account economic, financ ial and development needs of developing and LDC Members  to 
enable them to effectively participate in and benefit from the global trading system through e -
commerce. Rapid increase over the period and a paradigm shift during the pandemic , had further 
raised its importance. Its development ha d however  unevenly divided the world. Despite continuous 
efforts made in th at area, no tangible progress ha d been reached  so far. LDCs and LLDCs ha d an 
interest in e -commerce due to its potential benefits in terms of low p rice and high -quality products , 
as a result of increased competition and reduced costs of trade, better market opportunities for  
MSMEs, cost -saving in the financial sector such as e -banking , and new export opportunities to their 
companies, a mong others . Huge digital divide and several other constraints including institutional 
and human capacity constraints, weak regulatory mechanism s, lack of specific skills of e -commerce, 
poor access to computer hardware, software and servers, cyber security issu es, and data 
management, among others , however , posed severe challenges in conduct ing e-commerce.  
7.17.   Nepal recall ed the submission made by the LDC Group where it had identified some critical 
challenges for LDCs in the utilization of e -commerce. Enabling LDCs to participate in e -commerce 
and ensuring just benefits from i t, remain ed a critical concern that require d addressing their major 
constraints and challenges , as earlier  outlined. Widespread access to telecommunications at low 
prices and the latest technolo gy; human, institutional and technical infrastructure; capacity -building 
in the field of information technology  and promoting technology transfer and foreign direct 
investment , could be some important initiatives that need ed to be undertaken to enhanc e capacity 
to participate in e -commerce , and to make e -commerce inclusive and a win -win for all.  
7.18.   Benefits of e -commerce would not flow automatically to LDCs and LLDCs. A  comprehensive 
approach would therefore be necessary to ensure that they could benefit from e-commerce. 
Technical assistance alone would not be sufficient . Measures would have to be taken in r elation to 
the access of basic ICT infrastructure, technology, investment and market , as well as enhancing the 
quality of human resources and education.  The COVID -19 pandemic ha d increased an urgency of 
enabling LDCs and LLDCs to participate in e -commerce , not just to benefit from it but, more 
importantly, to survive in the global trading system in th e digital era of a global trade regime through 
the Work Programme. On the  moratorium, clarity on  its scope was extremely crucial. The 
implication s of the continuation of the moratorium should be assessed before taking any decision on 
it. Equity, certainty, avoidance of economic distortions , flexibility in tax treatment and fairness in 
the division of tax revenue among Members , were also no less important  in their consideration.  
7.19.   The representative of Norway  continue d to support the moratorium as it had created 
predictability for consumers, businesses, domestic regulators and customs authorities. Creating 
more uncertainty should not be the purpose of th e WTO . When assessing the economic implications 
of the moratorium, Norway  believe d in taking a ho listic approach. Members should consider the real 
economic benefits associated with the moratorium, not only theoretical customs revenue 
implications. Members  should keep in mind that the moratorium  did not prevent Members from 
imposing internal taxes, fees or other charges , nor did it preclude necessary regulatory measures at 
the national level.  The WTO's  core function was to reduce barriers to trade and economic exchange 
because such exchange contribute d positively to social and economic develop ment. Raising new WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 38 - 
 
  barriers to trade and economic cooperation went against th at fundamental rationale. Introducing 
market access barriers on electronic transmissions c ould only have a negative effect on the 
development of digital industries that depend ed on cross-border data flows. Norway agree d that it 
was important to continue Members' dialogue on the relationship between development and e -
commerce  and w as looking forward to continuing discussions under the Work Programme. Members  
could  benefit from analyt ical work done by other international organi zations, academia and the 
private sector  in that regard . 
7.20.   The representative of Uganda  associated with the statements of the LDC Group and the 
African Group.  Uganda echoed India by restating that t he General Counc il had been  mandated to 
continually review the 1998 Work Programme , including the  aspects of the moratorium , in 
accordance with P aragraph 1.2 of document WT/L/274 . In that regard, Uganda recalled that i n 
December 2019  Members had  decided to reinvigorate th e Work Programme with a mandate including 
to hold structure d discussions on trade -related topics for Members , including LDCs , and the scope  
and definition of the Moratorium . 
7.21.   The representative of the United Kingdom  recalled that the United Kingdom's position on the 
matter was adequately contained in the minutes of many previous meetings. The United Kingdom 
reiterated its  support to the Moratorium  which  should be made permanent . 
7.22.   The representative of Mauritius , on behalf of the Afr ican Group , noted that Members had  often 
heard that there was need to intensify their efforts on the 1998 Work Programme and to review the 
merits of the moratorium. Unfortunately, little progress ha d been noted over the past twenty  years 
despite the fact t hat their dependence on e -services ha d accentuated the need to make swift and 
effective progress in th at area. Discussions on e -commerce should focus on the fair and equitable 
distribution of benefits a nd on technology transfer and capacity building. The African Group therefore 
advocate d the need to reinvigorate the 1998 Work Programme with a view to comprehensively 
address the development aspects of e -commerce facing African countries.  Members  would soon be 
faced with the need to take a decision on the extension or not of the moratorium. Successively 
extending the Moratorium for the last two decades ha d not really been based on facts. Members  
needed to have a clear understanding of the impact of the Morato rium on areas of interest to African  
countries , including the costs to developing and LDC Members' consumers and businesses, 
discrepancies between traditional goods or products and electronic equivalents , and the application 
of internal taxes on electronic  transmission. The African Group  support ed the elements highlighted 
by the LDC Group in their submission to the General Council in December 2019 a nd the proposal by 
South Africa and India which had been  submitted to the General Council in December 2020.  
7.23.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , was aware of the lack of time, as the 
Decision on Electronic Commerce would expire before the next Ministerial Conference taking place 
at the end of the year. The Decision was being led entirely under the au spices of the General Council, 
and for that reason, should be a standing item on the agenda , as agreed in the 199 8 Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce, despite the specific work assigned to four regular bodies. 
Paragraph 1.2 of the Work Programme stipula ted: "The General Council shall play a central role in 
the whole process and keep the work programme under continuous review through a standing item 
on its agenda". The relevant bodies had reported on their work under the General Council's work 
programme. Nothing prevented the General Council from holding its crosscutting discussions in 
dedicated sessions. It had done so for several years. As agreed in the extension in December 2019, 
Members should continue the structured discussions under the 1998 Work Pro gramme based on 
Members' proposals , which included the proposal that LDCs had submitted in 2019 in document 
WT/GC/W/787.  
7.24.   The LDCs also supported a reinvigoration of the 1998 Work Programme and structured 
discussions based on Members' proposals, including i ts proposal submitted in 2019. That submission 
had developed a number of specific areas that required discussion , and concrete solutions to support 
LDCs and other developing countries facing the same constraints. The LDCs thanked the other 
developing count ries that had recently confirmed their support for the points made in the LDC 
submission , bearing in mind the importance of the structured discussions in the General Council. 
The aim was to seize the opportunity offered by electronic commerce. The communic ation also 
addressed the interest in resolving issues relating to electronic transmissions as raised in the 
communication from India and South Africa. More specifically, they had mentioned in their 
communication that the lack of clarity on the characterist ics of electronic transmissions and the WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 39 - 
 
  capacity of LDCs to implement internal taxes instead of tariffs, where appropriate, was one of the 
Group's concerns.  
7.25.   The representative of Bangladesh  associated with the statement of the LDC Group. The 1998 
Work Program me remained relevant.  Bangladesh referred to its statement at the March General 
Council  meeting and expresse d its readiness to engage in constructive discussion with Members.  
7.26.   The representative of South Africa  recall ed its submissions and statements made in th at 
regard  and thanked the Chairman for the consultations he had  initiated on th at issue. South Africa  
reiterate d the points entailed in the Joint Paper in document WT/GC/W/812 with India submitted in 
December 2020. In that Paper , they had  recalle d that the 1998 mandate call ed for sustained 
discussions on all trade -related aspects on e -commerce in the four relevant WTO bodies. It was also 
imperative for the G eneral Council to ensure that the 1998 Work Programme remain ed under 
"continuous review thr ough a standing item on its ( General Council 's) agenda and take up 
consideration of any trade -related issue of a cross -cutting nature (of issues) as entailed in the 1998 
Work Programme."  South Africa support ed the continuation of "structured discussions in  the General 
Council " which could  include the following items: developmental aspects of electronic commerce , 
scope, definition and impact of the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions and 
examination of the challenges experienced by developing countries and LDCs in relation to electronic 
commerce and explore ways of enhancing the participation of  developing countries in electronic 
commerce. When the Work Programme had been  launched in 1998, it would not have been possible 
nor imaginable to predict the far -reaching and fast -paced evolution of digital technologies and their 
effect on trade , that ha d led to the spread of e -commerce , as Members  had now come to know, 
including its implications on production processes. It was only through a truly multilateral process 
that issues identified by Members under the Work Programme , such as classification, defi nition and 
scope , could be clarified to enable a common understanding on e -commerce.  
7.27.   The definition and the scope of electronic transmissions  were being expanded continuously. 
Some definitions broaden ed the scope to cover all goods and services delivered v ia Mode 1. Mode 1 
services were disciplined under the GATS in the WTO with a positive list approach and that provide d 
considerable flexibilities to Members , especially developing countries , in terms of regulating their 
imports of services. More importantly , such a definition expand ed the trade coverage of the 
moratorium manifold. Using the WTO 's database on Trade in Services by Mode of Supply (TISMOS), 
UNCTAD estimate d that total imports of services via Mode 1 had amounted to USD 705 billion in 
2017, while total imports of digitizable products had been  around USD 80 billion in 2017. T herefore, 
using the broader definition of electronic transmissions  substantially increase d the trade coverage 
of the moratorium by multiples and ha d implications for Members ' current obligations under the 
GATS.  
7.28.   South Africa  took note of the growth of e -commerc e including during the COVID -19 pandemic  
but also note d that its benefits were highly uneven with high levels of concentration. E -commerce 
was evolving rapidly and was a multi -faceted issue that c ould not be reduced to rules only. The Work 
Programme had been  designed to adopt a comprehensive and holistic approach to e -commerce to 
ensure equitable benefits for all in e -commerce. The reinvigoration of the Work Programme was 
critical , given its interest on the development dimension of the longstanding area of work in the 
multilateral framework of the WTO, including digital industriali zation , and the need to address the 
digital divide.  The lack of commitment to the developmental aspects of the WTO mandated work 
was a cause for concern and contribute d to lack of progress on many issues in the WTO. Internal 
taxes serve d a different purpos e to customs duties. Customs duties , by their nature , were utilized 
as an instrument for industrialization and Members should have the flexibility to deploy th at policy 
tool to support the development of their local digital economy. It was for th at reason that South 
Africa  believe d that the continuation of discussions on the scope and definition of e -commerce was 
required . Otherwise , a decision at MC12 w ould be a challenge in the absence of a shared 
understanding and a Work Programme that ensure d equitable benefits in WTO rules. South Africa 
stood ready to engage constructively on the issues under  the Work Programme.  
7.29.   The representative of Chile said that s tudies ha d shown the benefits of the moratorium . Lifting 
the Moratorium would have limited fiscal benefits and would remove  many other benefits . On that 
basis, Chile was convinced of the benefits of maintaining the moratorium and hope d it would be 
renewed on a permanent basis. Chile could not support the proposal to make  discussions on the 
Work Programme and the moratorium as a standing item on the General Council agenda nor any 
other competent bodies. The Chairman's report on the implementation of outcomes from the Bali, WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 40 - 
 
  Nairobi and Buenos Aires already included th ose topics. It was under th e Work Programme where  
Members c ould table matters of interest. Chile recalled that the existing structure of the Work 
Programme already provided many  opportunities for discussion on concrete substantive matters . 
7.30.   The representative  of Singapore  heard the call for greater attention to be paid to e-commerce. 
As previously communicated at the Informal Open -ended meeting on 29 April , Singapore strongly 
support ed the permanent renewal of the Moratorium. It was  not necessary to have a standing 
agenda item in the G eneral Council . Singapore u rged all Members to focus on the substance rather 
than the form of the issue at hand. They all ha d a shared objective and interest to better understand 
e-commerce , especially on how it c ould drive post C OVID -19 pandemic recovery. Instead of 
bickering over procedural matters, Members  should focus on building on the existing work in the 
various Committees. For example, in recent months , Members  had seen constructive and useful 
conversations in the C TS on the agenda item:  "Exchange of Information and Experiences based on 
Submission s by Members ". It was clearly in Members'  interest that the WTO was well equipped to  
address digital trade and e -commerce effectively. Digital trade was the future of trade. From the 
ongoing JSI negotiations to the Work Programme, th ose were all pathways that w ould enable the 
WTO to remain a forum at the forefront in shaping global trade discourse. For example, issues around 
digital divide and digital incl usion , such as  MSMEs and women entrepreneurs , were clearly important 
to all. For as long as Members  continue d to regurgitate entrenched positions and focus on form over 
substance , be it on the JSI or the Work Programme, they would not be able to constructi vely advance 
that issue in the WTO and w ould all be worse off. Singapore reiterate d its call to shift gears and 
begin to engage in genuine discussions. Specifically , on the  Work Programme, Singapore welcome d 
any discussion or ideas on how to deepen the existing technical work in the various Committees.  
7.31.   The representative of Saint Lucia , on behalf of CARICOM , associated with the statement of 
the Pacific Group. The CARICOM Group attache d great importance to the  Work Programme and was 
committed to its reinvigoration , in keeping with the  December 2019 decision. Key for the 
reinvigoration, as Members  prepare d for MC12 and beyond, was the scheduling of structured 
discussions over the coming months , as had been refer red to in t he report  of the Chairman's initial 
consultations a nd the views expressed by Members at the Informal Open -ended meeting. CARICOM 
looked forward to updates regarding possible dates for th ose discussions and the identification of 
the specific trad e-related issues of relevance to Members which would be the focus of their dialogue.  
The structured discussions should have a development focus and the CARICOM Group  had offered 
some ideas in th at regard in its statement the previous  week. CARICOM  stood ready to engage 
meaningfully and highlight ed the value that could be derived through the involvement of relevant 
international organizations. On the moratorium, engagement was key at th at stage as Members  
ramped up preparations for MC12. Their discussion in 2020  had been  useful but more clarity on 
scope, definition and implications was critical to move the Membership closer to the common 
understanding on the way forward. Dialogue on the moratorium should form part of Members'  
structured discussions in the period ahead. CARICOM  stood ready to engage constructively towards 
the collaborative formulation of the mutually agreeable recommendation on the moratorium for the 
consideration of Ministers at MC12.  
7.32.   The representative of the Republic of Moldova  welcome d discussions from the previous  week 
under the Work Programme , particularly on the Moratorium  and on e-commerce in the context of  
the pandemic. A s previously noted, Moldova  would continue to support the extension of the 
moratorium which create d flexibilities for businesses , consumers a nd governments. Considering its 
undoubtedly positive economic implications , as demonstrated by several studies , Moldova was 
positively thinking of  making the moratorium permanent in the future. Additionally, similar to many 
other Members that had spoke n, Moldova  viewed that introducing a new burden  on electronic 
transmissions could have  a very negative impact on the development of the digital industry . 
Additional trade barriers would definitely p aint a negative image for the WTO  – sending a wrong 
signal in the context of e -commerce activities  during a global  pandemic.  
7.33.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  reaffirm ed its continued support to the Work 
Programme . Hong Kong, China remained  open-minded to any concrete suggestions from Members, 
especially other developing and LDC Members, that would contribute to organising structured 
discussions under the Work Programme , that respond ed to Members ' prioritie s. Hong Kong, China 
was also open -minded about the format in which further discussions under the Work Programme 
were to be held, including discussions at the relevant WTO bodies, dedicated General Council 
meetings or thematic workshops outside regular meet ing cycles in the lead -up to MC12, but d id not 
support including it as a standing agenda item in regular General Council meetings. Hong Kong, WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 41 - 
 
  China  looked forward to engaging constructively with other Members on th at important subject.  On 
the moratorium, Hong Kong, China support ed making it permanent . Even if consensus on making it 
permanent could not be reached by MC12, Members should at least extend it un til the  next Ministerial 
Conference. Th at would be critical to the post -pandemic global economic recovery and w ould avoid 
bringing unnecessary uncertainties and disruptions to the global e -commerce activities.  
7.34.   The representative of Japan  recogni zed the imp ortance of the Work Programme  which had 
provided a solid foundation for the longstanding practice of the moratorium on customs duties. Japan  
would continue to engage in the work under the Work Programme in an appropriate manner in the 
run up to MC12 based on the agreement in the General Council in December 2019. Under the General 
Council, th e discussion related to the Work Programme c ould be covered under the agenda: 
"Implementation of the Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires Outcomes ". Japan  was not convinced th at 
there was a need to have a dedicated standing agenda item for th e Work Programme. Furthermore, 
there would be opportunities to have discussions on the Work Programme in other relevant WTO 
bodies such as the CTS and the CTG. The objective of the moratori um was to provide certainty and 
predictability in digital trade and better access to digital products for both consumers and businesses, 
including MSMEs. The importance of the Moratorium gain ed its gravity in a world experiencing a 
serious pandemic. Members  should extend their current multilateral practice of the moratorium at 
MC12  and Japan  hoped that this w ould become permanent eventually.  
7.35.   The representative of Switzerland  recall ed that the Work Programme was already periodically 
discussed by th e General  Council under the agenda item on the implementation of Ministerial 
Decisions.  Switzerland thanked the Chairman  for holding an open -ended meeting the previous  week. 
In addition, other WTO bodies offer ed ample opportunit ies for substantive discussions. It was 
therefore better to follow past practice . Switzerland  did not see any added value in a permanent 
item on the agenda of the General Council . Switzerland was  ready to participate in the revitali zation 
of the Work Progr amme and to continue the structured discussions as agreed in December 2019.  
Those discussions should take place at the right time and with appropriate preparations. Switzerland  
was also ready to continue discussions on the various aspects of the moratorium . Bridging the digital 
divide on the one hand and putting in place rules to regulate digital trade on the other, were not 
contradictory undertakings. Work on th ose two fields of action was necessary and complementary. 
The Moratorium was an important framew ork condition for the digital economy and ha d contributed 
to the development of international trade. Switzerland  believe d that it should be made permanent.  
7.36.   The representative of India thank ed Members for the engagement t hat day in th at agenda 
item. India was  expecting that the discussion in the last three General Council  meetings  and also 
that day would have throw n some light on the scope and impact and definition of th e Moratorium . 
Unfortunately, Members  were not getting anywhere near  clarifying  those subjects. Not having th at 
clarity would make it  difficult for Members  to guide or advise their Ministers for a decision on th at 
crucial issue at MC12 . Time was running out . Members  had less months left . India  again request ed 
the Chairman  to start this structured discussion on the moratorium including on its scope, impact 
and definition.  Members had had  the fisheries subsid ies negotiation s for twenty  years where they 
were willing to conclude discipline s. The moratorium was  a case where a matter had been given a 
decision for the last twenty  years w ithout Members  being certain of its scope and impact. W hile the 
proponents of the continuation of the moratorium  continued to seek S&DT  for digital trade  – given 
that it was treated differe ntly from physical trade of goods – they d id not see similar merit in S&DT 
for developing Members in fisheries negotiations. It was interesting to see how long a fast -growing 
sector like digital trade would need this moratorium. Members  always hear d the phrases "need 
based ", "case-by-case" and  "evidence based " while discussing fisheries , TRIPS Waiver or LDC 
Graduation . But th ose phrases were not mentioned when talk ing about the Moratorium 's 
continuation. Duty free, quota free had been  a tool given for LDCs.  Unfortunatel y, this tool in th e 
guise of the moratorium was coming to the aid of  developed  Members. G rowth in digital trade was 
not reliant on the moratorium . At the same time , loss in re venue and impact on domestic digital 
industry policy space was a fact. India therefore  request ed the Chairman to start th e structured 
discussion and keep it as a standing item on the agenda for  the succeeding General Council meetings.  
7.37.   The General Council took note  of the statements5. 
 
5 At its request, the statement of the delegation of Colombia is incorporated in the Minutes of this General 
Council meeting and can be found in Annex 1 of this document.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 42 - 
 
  8  PAPER TITLED "THE LEGAL STATUS OF 'JOINT STATEMENT INITIATIVES' AND THEIR 
NEGOTIATED OUTCOMES" – REQUEST FROM INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA 
(WT/GC/W/819/ REV.1) 
8.1.  The Chairman  recalled that the item was 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. The item 
had been first introduced at the General Council meeting held on 1, 2 and 4 March; and a revision 
to the document had been issued to add Namibia as a co -sponsor.  
8.2.  The representative of India spoke under agenda items 4 and 8. On agenda item 4, India 
thanked the United States for supporting the waiver and for agreeing to participate in text -based 
negotiations at the WTO. India urged other Members to also join and support text -based negotiations 
regarding this proposal.  
8.3.  On agenda item 8, India thanked Namibia for co -sponsoring the paper and the negotiated 
outcomes submitted by South Africa and India. India reiterated what they had said at the last 
General Council meeting, that they were not questioning the right of Members to meet and discuss 
any issue, but that when such discussions turned into negotiations and their outcomes were to be 
brought into the WTO rulebook, the fundamental rules of the WTO should be followed.  
8.4.  Any attempt to introduce new rules resulting from Joint Statement Initiatives  (JSIs) 
negotiations into the WTO, without fulfilling the requirements of Articles IX and X of the Marrakesh 
Agreement, would create a precedent for any group of Members to bring any issue into the WTO 
without the required consensus, by -passing the collect ive oversight of Members for bringing in new 
rules or amendments to existing rules, and usurping limited WTO resources available for multilateral 
negotiations. Most importantly, such an approach would undermine the balance in agenda -setting 
and result in M embers disregarding existing multilateral mandates arrived at through consensus, in 
favour of matters without multilateral mandates, leading to the marginalization or exclusion of issues 
which were difficult but critical, such as agriculture.  
8.5.  The paper onl y stated that basic fundamental principles and rules of the rules -based 
multilateral trading system, as enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement, should be followed by all 
Members, including by participants of JSIs. The paper also listed options for JSI propon ents to bring 
in their negotiated outcomes in the WTO, including an option for proponents of a flexible multilateral 
trading system advocating various JSIs, to even seek an amendment to Article X of the Marrakesh 
Agreement, following procedures enshrined t herein to provide for such an approach.  
8.6.  A number of delegations had stated that they did not agree with the contents of the paper. 
However, India had not heard a legal basis for the disagreement and urged those Members to 
express their views more explicitl y on the various elements of the paper.  
8.7.  Regarding some of the institutional aspects of the paper and the argument that if JSIs were 
not allowed to go through, the multilateral trading system or the WTO would be under threat, India 
recalled the Tokyo Round  Plurilateral Codes which had created a fragmented system of rules. For 
some Contracting Parties, GATT rules had been applicable , while for others, GATT rules and the rules 
of the Plurilateral Codes had been applicable, which had created considerable compl exity in 
determining which obligations were applicable to which Contracting Parties.  
8.8.  Recognizing the problems that had been created by the fragmented system of trade rules on 
account of the Tokyo Round Codes, WTO Members had sought an end to th e problem. That had been 
clearly articulated in the Preamble to the Marrakesh Agreement which stated "[r]esolved, therefore, 
to develop an integrated, more viable and durable multilateral trading system" – with emphasis on 
the term "integrated". Reference to an "inte grated multilateral trading system" clearly highlighted 
the concerns of WTO Members arising from the fragmentation of multilateral rules on account of 
Tokyo Round Plurilateral Codes.  
8.9.  This had also been evident from the observation of the Appellate Body in  one of the earliest 
disputes under the WTO , which stated that "[t]he authors of the new WTO regime intended to put 
an end to the fragmentation that had characterized the previous system. This can be seen from the 
preamble to the WTO Agreement in pertinent  part: Resolved, therefore, to develop an integrated, WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 43 - 
 
  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 Uruguay Round  
of Multilateral Trade Negotiations."  
8.10.   Therefore, going back to plurilateral agreements would be a step in the wrong direction and 
would be contrary to the Preamble. JSIs did not have a multilateral mandate and, at the end, for 
MC12 to be successful, WTO Me mbers needed to build trust among each other and build confidence 
in the multilateral trading system. This should be done in the path towards MC12 and also at the 
Ministerial Conference itself.  
8.11.   The representative of Nepal  pointed out that the WTO had been established to safeguard 
multilateralism and facilitate rules -based, predictable, transparent and inclusive trade, with the 
broad objectives of raising living standards; reaching full employment, high real income and effective 
demand; and expanding the pro duction of, and trade in, goods and services.  
8.12.   Consensus -based decision -making was one of the main strengths of the WTO and, therefore, 
should be maintained not only in major decisions but also in the entire negotiation process. 
Successful conclusion of ma ndated negotiations such as fisheries subsidies negotiation, agriculture 
negotiation, and special and differential treatment negotiation, among others, would be more 
relevant for the Membership rather than focusing on plurilateral initiatives in a multilat eral 
organization.  
8.13.   Nepal had observed that over the past few years, the WTO had been making huge efforts on 
some plurilateral initiatives. The size of the economy and the share of global trade behind those 
JSIs, might not have been sufficient to drive the initiatives to ensure an inclusive and sustainable 
multilateral trading system. Leaving a significant number of Members outside the initiatives, might 
not contribute to achieving the broad objectives of the organization.  
8.14.   Any initiative needed to bring all  Members onboard, irrespective of the size of their economy 
and their volume of trade. The number of Members outside the JSIs and the size of the population 
they covered were in no way less important.  Therefore, Nepal was in favour of the paper submitted 
and supported its essence, as it was consistent with the promotion and protection of the multilateral 
trading system. Concluding the mandated negotiations at the highest possible level through the 
upcoming Ministerial Conference was what was most important . 
8.15.   The representative of Tanzania  recalled their statement in the previous General Council 
meeting of March 2021, that the paper should guide and remind Members of the agreed rules, 
principles, and procedures of the multilateral organization. JSIs were the product of the lack of 
consensus among Members on issues, for which like -minded groups of Members had decided to 
pursue on their own, outside the framework of the WTO.   
8.16.   The outcomes that would be attained in JSI configurations, would be binding for partici pating 
Members. JSIs had issues of serious implication to existing policy space and would constrain 
development endeavours. However, Tanzania would not object to other Members pursuing their 
interests through JSIs. Nevertheless, Tanzania encouraged them to  subject the issues being pursued 
to Article X.9 of the Marrakesh Agreement, for their inclusion in the WTO Agreements as plurilateral 
outcomes.   
8.17.   The representative of Costa Rica  noted that the arguments and doubts raised in the paper in 
relation to JSIs were based on an incorrect reading of the WTO Agreements, as well as an incorrect 
interpretation of the work carried out under those initiatives. Costa Rica participated in all the JSIs 
and did so with the conviction that they had a solid legal basis in th e WTO Agreements. JSIs 
contributed to the multilateral trading system, reinforcing its negotiating role.  
8.18.   Negotiations on Services Domestic Regulation, the JSI coordinated by Costa Rica, and the 
outcome it would produce, were firmly grounded in WTO rules. T he result would consist of a set of 
disciplines on licensing, qualifications and technical standards that would only bind participating 
Members, but would benefit service providers of all Members who traded with participating Members, 
who represented more than 70% of world trade in services.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 44 - 
 
  8.19.   The expected result would be incorporated into the GATS Schedules of Specific Commitments 
of participating Members. In essence, this would encompass the types of measures listed in the 
GATS as additional commitment area s, namely, "qualifications, standards and licensing issues" . The 
paper had suggested that the disciplines developed by the JSI would constitute a kind of "norm", 
unspecified, that did not fit into the architecture of the services lists, which was not the c ase. Rather, 
those disciplines constituted enhancements to existing commitments of participating Members, who 
would give legal effect to the results by inscribing the disciplines as additional commitments in their 
respective GATS schedules, following multi lateral procedures established in the WTO to improve 
Members' schedules of specific commitments.  
8.20.   While JSI participants did not agree that the disciplines in question could be understood in 
any way that would undermine existing GATS obligations, they fully  agreed that the disciplines 
should not be understood as a weakening of any provision contained in the GATS. Indeed, 
participants had recently added language to the negotiating text that clearly stated that disciplines 
should not be construed as lowering a ny obligation under the GATS. The mandate of Article VI:4 of 
the GATS — to develop any necessary discipline on domestic regulation — was not seen, would not 
be seen and could not be affected by the fact that Members participating in the JSI would make 
comm itments and include additional information in national regulations.  
8.21.   JSIs remained open and transparent, and all Members were welcome to join their meetings 
and engage constructively with the participants, to ensure that the outcome would benefit providers  
around the world, and that it would include as many Members as possible.  
8.22.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , took note of the paper and called on 
the General Council to provide answers to the questions it raised.  
8.23.   The representative of Australia  reiterated , as at the last General Council meeting, their strong 
support for plurilateral initiatives as a means to a ddress modern trade challenges, strengthen the 
WTO's rulemaking function and restore the WTO's health more generally.  
8.24.   Australia was participating in all ongoing JSI negotiations and noted that more than 
110 Members were participating in one or more of those negotiations. Th at demonstrated the broad 
acknowledgement from across the Membership that it was a legitimate and useful form of 
rulemaking. Those negotiations remained inclusive, transparent and open to all Members to join.  
8.25.   Australia did not agree w ith the legal arguments put forward in the paper – including the need 
for consensus in order for Members to either launch plurilateral initiatives or collectively improve 
their schedules, as the possible legal pathway to implement the outcomes of JSIs. Aus tralia agreed 
with the points made by Costa Rica with respect to the Services Domestic Regulation negotiations, 
that the improvements to Member’s Schedules was a legitimate and well understood means to 
implement agreed changes.  
8.26.   Plurilateral initiatives ha d always been a key part of the WTO architecture and would remain 
vital in modernising and enhancing the WTO rulebook for the benefit of the whole Membership. 
Australia encouraged all Members to participate in — or at least keep an open mind on — those 
plurilateral initiatives.  
8.27.   The representative of the European Union  said that plurilateral agreements had been a driving 
force under the GATT and beyond , and had paved the way for many of the multilateral agreements 
that were an integral part of the WTO Agreem ent. They were not antithetical to multilateralism; on 
the contrary, they paved the way towards it. Beyond those agreements, the WTO's negotiating arm 
had not been able to deliver many of the significant improvements in the multilateral trade rulebook 
that were needed to respond to important trade issues. It was clear that modernising WTO rules 
could not be achieved only through multilateral agreements based on a single undertaking. It was 
therefore vital for the WTO's relevance and credibility to maintain the option of developing rules that 
responded to the economic and trade realities of the 21st century through plurilateral agreements.  
8.28.   A very large number of WTO members were involved in plurilateral negotiations under the 
JSIs on Services Domestic Regulat ion, Electronic Commerce and Investment Facilitation for 
Development. JSIs brought many benefits and were essential to making global trade rules responsive WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 45 - 
 
  to the digital transformation of economies, the growing importance of services and the need to 
facilitate investment, which was key for development.  
8.29.   If no effective formula was found to integrate plurilaterals in to the WTO, there would be no 
other option than developing such rules outside the WTO framework, which would increase the 
fragmentation created  by the multitude of Regional Trade Agreements and risked eventually 
condemning the WTO to irrelevance. Meaningful WTO reform should recognize that reality. The 
European Union favoured an inclusive approach to open, plurilateral agreements that facilitated  
participation by developing countries and allowed them to decide whether they wished to join the 
agreement, leaving the door open for them to join at a later date.  
8.30.   There were various ways in which plurilaterals could be incorporated in the WTO. Some were  
included already in the WTO Agreement s, such as in the GATS , which provided that Members could 
inscribe additional commitments in their schedules, which was the legal architecture that the 
participants in the JSI on Services Domestic Regulation had chosen .  
8.31.   Nobody could doubt the benefits of various types of plurilaterals. What mattered was not their 
legal form, but that they brought undeniable benefits. Legal form should be a secondary 
consideration. The focus should be on how the organization could remai n relevant by developing 
rules that addressed pressing issues.  
8.32.   The European Union favoured further discussions on the paper with Members and to seek to 
establish a Working Group on WTO reform at MC12, to serve as a forum for discussion around 
institutional  aspects of WTO reform that were of systemic interest, such as the issue of plurilaterals 
and how to better integrate them into the WTO architecture.  
8.33.   The representative of the Russian Federation  was disappointed with the repeated attempts of 
challenging th e compliance of JSIs with the core principles of the Marrakesh Agreement. JSIs were 
broadly supported by Members, a large number of whom were involved in plurilateral negotiations. 
Those discussions were not conducted behind closed doors, they were open fo r every interested 
Member. The outcomes of such deliberations would benefit not only participating Members but the 
entire Membership on an MFN basis.  
8.34.   WTO Agreements traditionally encouraged Members to enter into reciprocal and mutually 
advantageous arrange ments towards further trade liberalization. For instance, disciplines on 
domestic regulation in services did not impose any rules on non -participating Members, but 
constituted a step forward to a higher level of commitments regarding the supply of services  in the 
markets of all participating Members.  
8.35.   Overall, the negotiating function of the WTO was seriously lacking, with a crisis looming over 
the whole system. Obstructing JSIs would further accelerate the tendency to use other forums to 
develop trade rules , just because consensus within the WTO was unattainable and every new 
initiative was immediately blocked.  
8.36.   The Russian Federation referred to its statement at the previous General Council meeting and 
reiterated that the WTO should find ways to ad apt the e xisting WTO legal framework to modern 
trends and challenges. Progress achieved in all JSIs demonstrated the effectiveness of the approach.  
8.37.   The representative of the United Kingdom  noted that it had spoken in detail on the issue 
before, and their comments could be found in the official minutes. They continued to think - as 
pointed out by the European Union, Australia, Costa Rica and the Russian Federation - that there 
was real value in those JSIs.   
8.38.   Indeed, they saw those JSIs as shining examples of how Mem bers of this organisation could 
come together to free up trade in some of those areas where business was getting ahead of what 
had been agreed here; and they could make real benefits to businesses and people as they try and 
build back better from the curre nt pandemic.  
8.39.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  noted that, as the DG had once stated, "plurilateral 
initiatives had brought new energy into the multilateral trading system"; evidence of which was the WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 46 - 
 
  large proportion of Members participating in JSIs. Th e creative JSI approach was highly important 
to update the WTO rules and to make the WTO a living organization.  
8.40.   The JSI on Services Domestic Regulation sought to improve market access commitments of 
participating Members; the Electronic Commerce JSI aimed to respond to the prevalent digital trade; 
and the Investment Facilitation for Development JSI worked on helping Members streamline their 
own investment procedures. Those JSIs did not pose a threat to non -participating Members, and 
instead, benefitted all Members, including those who did not participate in them.  
8.41.   At a critical time of rebuilding the credibility of the WTO, seeking the enhancement of its 
negotiation function and responding to the real needs of global trade, Members needed to jointly 
think abo ut how plurilateral agreements could be integrated into the multilateral trading system for 
WTO rules to respond to the rapid development in the real world.  
8.42.   Chinese Taipei urged Members to discuss a way forward, taking into account the respective 
developm ent stages and maintaining the existing rights and obligations of Members.  
8.43.   The representative of Norway  noted that the multilateral, rules -based trading system had 
gone through tremendous changes since 1947; and initiatives by individual Members and groups  of 
Members had been a natural part of its development. Nothing impeded Members from working on 
and negotiating new rules at the WTO. JSIs responded to Members' ambitions to update their rule 
book by addressing issues of relevance in the 21st century.  
8.44.   Such initiatives were both welcome and needed, as they injected energy into the organization 
and prevented it from stagnating and becoming irrelevant. Norway agreed with Costa Rica's 
description of the JSI on Services Domestic Regulation. Current initiatives covered a variety of issues 
and the format of the negotiated outcomes would be diverse, also in their legal architecture, and 
could not therefore be predefined or prejudged.  
8.45.   The representative of Indonesia  said that the discussion on the legal status of JS Is and their 
negotiated outcomes were both timely and important. While Indonesia participated in two JSIs, it 
had also put forward the same question upon joining those initiatives.  
8.46.   On the JSI on Investment Facilitation for Development, Indonesia had sough t information on 
what steps would be taken to integrate the outcome to the WTO, knowing that there was no WTO 
mandate on that initiative. Indonesia looked forward to such discussions and would like to 
understand better how the co -convenors of JSIs would tr y to integrate them into the WTO 
framework. The pursuance of an ambitious agenda on several trade -related matters through the 
WTO should respect the fundamental principles set out in the Marrakesh Agreement. An agreed 
understanding would provide a level of  comfort for all Members to engage in JSI negotiations.  
8.47.   The representative of Nigeria  noted that they had shared their views on the issue at the CTS 
of 5 March. They reiterated their disagreement with the assertion that JSIs were likely to undermine 
the mu ltilateral trading system. Plurilateral arrangements had always been critical building blocks of 
the multilateral trading system, even during the times of the GATT.  
8.48.   Nigeria considered that the views that had been expressed in the paper regarding the likely  
implication of introducing new JSI rules into the WTO due to perceived inconsistencies, was 
premature because negotiations were ongoing and participants in the JSIs were working towards 
achieving balanced and equitable WTO -consistent outcomes. For instanc e, participants under the 
JSI on Services Domestic Regulation were working towards inscribing additional commitments into 
their GATS schedule, in accordance with Article XVIII, which would confer benefits to every Member, 
including non -participants, on an MFN basis. This would further strengthen the multilateral trading 
system and should be commended and encouraged.  
8.49.   The legal opinion of a Member or group of Members on the scope of application of specific 
provisions of the Marrakesh Agreement or other WTO Ag reements could also be inaccurate. For 
instance, even though Article IX of the Marrakesh Agreement emphasized decision making by 
consensus, it also envisaged other decision -making situations and made provision for alternative 
options. JSIs were of critical  importance if the WTO was to be responsive to the economic realities 
of the 21st century.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 47 - 
 
  8.50.   The representative of Chile emphasi zed that JSIs had contributed to strengthening the 
multilateral trading system. They covered areas that were fundamental for trade in the 21st century 
and for sustainable development. Discussions under JSIs took place in an open, transparent and 
inclusive manner. JSIs had opened up a pragmatic, respectful and necessary path to overcome the 
challenges in negotiati ons at the WTO, which had been reflected in the crosscutting nature of the 
issues being addressed in each JSI and in the involvement of two -thirds of the Membership 
participating in those initiatives. Because of the significance and the benefits that they could have, 
Chile respected the decision of some Members not to associate themselves in them. At the same 
time, those Members should respect the decision of those who had decided to participate in JSIs and 
who wanted to move towards negotiations.  
8.51.   Chile ag reed with Costa Rica's description of the JSI on Services Domestic Regulation. With 
regards to the Structured Discussions on Investment Facilitation for Development, coordinated by 
Chile, some Members had expressed their interest in discussing the legal ar chitecture of a future 
agreement. They would hold an academic session at the end of May, to explore various options. As 
with all JSIs, it remained open to all WTO Members.  
8.52.   The representative of Mexico  said that JSIs provided an excellent opportunity to fur nish the 
WTO with tools that would allow it to face the current challenges in global trade. Since some Members 
were not ready to advance at the same speed as the rest, JSIs presented a good alternative to 
prevent the WTO from irrelevance due to the inabili ty to incorporate rules on areas that had not 
been covered.  
8.53.   JSIs did not erode the rights and obligations of non -participating Members. In the spirit of 
promoting trade as a vehicle for development, Mexico was a strong supporter of JSIs, whose work 
was car ried out in an open, inclusive, transparent manner and on the basis of voluntary participation.  
8.54.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  noted that at a time when the role of the WTO 
itself was being questioned by governments and businesses, JSIs repres ented the most viable path 
to update the rulebook and making the WTO more relevant. JSIs were also open to all, transparent 
to all and responsive to all. More than 125 Members were taking part in one or several JSIs, and 
they encouraged others to do so as well.  
8.55.   The representative of Pakistan  said that the paper raised pertinent questions on an element 
of fundamental nature for the WTO. Notwithstanding the content or topic in any JSI, they posed a 
serious challenge to the consensus -based decision -making pri nciple of the multilateral system.  While 
some Members wished to advance certain discussions, that did not take away the desire of a large 
number of Members to address other issues or consider some of the subjects taken up by JSIs as 
premature for negotiati ons. Consensus lied at the core of the WTO. Taking everyone along, 
regardless of their background, objectives or speed at which they could move, had been a hallmark 
of multilateralism; its centre would be struck if that were compromised.  
8.56.   JSI participants n oted that JSIs were open, transparent and inclusive, but so was the WTO 
and its main bodies. Moving ahead without consensus could only mean two things: either Members 
wished to head in a direction where others did want to go, or they had wished to move away from 
those that were not yet ready for those discussions.  
8.57.   Pakistan had joined the initial exploratory discussions on JSIs, but since then they had 
developed into fully fledged negotiations on potential agreemen ts that could cut across existing 
rights and obligations of Members that were not part of JSIs. True inclusivity would have called for 
that to be manifested before launching the JSIs. Pakistan saw the questions posed in the paper as 
pertinent and looked fo rward to discussing that aspect, particularly with reference to upholding the 
fundamental pillars of the system.  
8.58.   The representative of Turkey  considered the matter as crucial not only for the future of 
ongoing JSIs but also for the WTO itself. Turkey was a strong supporter of the multilateral trading 
system and recognized that multilateral platforms were ideal for an incremental dismantling of 
obstacles for trade in goods and services. However, reaching multilateral agreements could 
sometimes not be an eas y task for the Membership and some Members could want to advance their 
discussions on certain areas they considered necessary.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 48 - 
 
  8.59.   In this context, Turkey believed that additional instruments and different configurations would 
benefit the Membership and reinf orce their negotiations, which should remain open, transparent and 
inclusive, and adhere to the main principles of the WTO. Relevant methods to integrate the outcomes 
of JSIs into the WTO acquis could be further discussed among the Membership.  
8.60.   The represen tative of Bangladesh  associated with the statement delivered by Chad on behalf 
of the LDC Group. Bangladesh was a strong supporter of multilateralism and underlined that it should 
be the main principle of the WTO. The questions and concerns that had been r aised in the paper 
were important and demanded a deeper discussion involving all WTO Members.  
8.61.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  noted that they had expressed their views on the 
issues raised in the communication from India and South Africa on the lega l status of Joint Statement 
Initiatives (JSIs); and highlighted a few key points. They believed that JSIs would serve to moderni ze 
and strengthen the multilateral trading system in areas of increasing relevance to the global trading 
system, and they would allow Members to discuss new trade rules that responded to the aspirations 
of consumers and business communities across the globe.  
8.62.   JSIs built upon rather than competed with the ongoing mandated work under existing WTO 
bodies and programmes, such as the Wor king Party on Domestic Regulation and the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce. In particular, JSIs were progressing well and the JSIs on 
Electronic Commerce and Investment Facilitation for Development had scheduled discussions on 
their legal structure be fore the summer break.   
8.63.   Hong Kong, China encouraged Members, including those who could have concerns about the 
legal structure of JSIs, to join those discussions so that their views could be taken into account fully 
and accurately. JSI s' participants shou ld first focus their discussions on the substance, and after 
reaching broad consensus on the substance, participants would be able to identify a suitable legal 
format to incorporate their outcomes into the WTO framework.   
8.64.   The representative of Singapore  made three points: first, that plurilateral processes such as 
JSIs were legitimate within the WTO, and that to argue otherwise would be misleading. There were 
precedents of plurilateral negotiations in the WTO, including the Information Technology Agreement  
(ITA) and the Government Procurement Agreement (GPA). The most significant feature of ongoing 
JSIs was that they remained open, transparent and inclusive. Participation of all Members was 
encouraged, as had always been the spirit of negotiations at the WT O. JSIs enjoyed very broad 
support in the WTO — over 140 Members participated in at least one JSI, and barely 20 Members 
sat out completely.   
8.65.   Second, it was premature to discuss the legal nature of JSI outcomes. The substance of the 
agreements should be d etermined before considering the legal modalities, without pre -judging the 
outcome. There had been good momentum across all JSIs, as had been evidenced by the high level 
of constructive engagement, and the various milestones that had been periodically anno unced.  
Negotiations should not stop because of different views held by some Members. The WTO was at a 
crossroad where the choice could be made between a more productive and constructive approach, 
and the forging of fruitful outcomes through JSIs, or provi ng critics right, that the WTO had become 
paralysed.  
8.66.   Third, plurilaterals ensured that the WTO would remain relevant by allowing Members to 
address current important issues. The emergence of JSIs around the year 2017 had taken place 
after prolonged period s of languishing talks without prospects of attaining consensus from the full 
Membership. In that context, JSIs represented concrete bright spots that had brought together 
Members who were determined to work towards meaningful outcomes that would address n ew and 
emerging issues. JSIs had demonstrated that the WTO remained relevant to all stakeholders and 
could deliver results.  
8.67.   The momentum of JSI negotiations should be maintained, and as responsible WTO Members, 
Singapore encouraged bridging differences and  working together to strengthen the WTO.  
8.68.   The representative of Japan  appreciated the contribution of JSIs to update the WTO rulebook 
and to ensure the relevance of the WTO. Without JSIs, the WTO risked becoming less relevant and 
even losing its raison d'ê tre as a cornerstone of the multilateral trading system. Japan recalled that WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 49 - 
 
  a number of achievements made in the GATT and the WTO had been initially taken up or discussed 
in plurilateral initiatives and had later been merged into the multilateral system.  
8.69.   Japan believed that JSIs were legitimate and consistent with the WTO. JSI meetings were 
organized in an open, transparent and inclusive manner. The convenience of Members and the size 
of their delegations had been taken into account to organize the proces s, and the fact that many 
WTO Members were participating in JSIs and actively engaging in negotiations in a creative and 
innovative way, clearly showed their importance and relevance. Japan had high hopes that JSIs 
would be a key part of MC12 outcomes. Jap an would continue to work with other Members to deliver 
substantial outcomes in the JSIs.  
8.70.   The representative of Sri Lanka  supported the arguments presented in the paper submitted 
by India, South Africa and other co -sponsors, and echoed their concerns as e xpressed at the previous 
Council meetings on this proposal. From the reports circulated by the JSIs' Chairs, Sri Lanka was of 
the understanding that the JSI on Domestic Service Regulation would be ready to be presented to 
MC12 for a decision and that other  JSIs would aim to harvest focused work programmes for further 
work. Sri Lanka reminded Members that the WTO was fundamentally a multilateral institution, the 
only multilateral trade institution. The Marrakesh Agreement called on Members to "facilitate" an d 
"further the objectives of this Agreement", which included its multilateral nature. JSIs were eroding 
the multilateral character and mandate in very problematic ways.  
8.71.   Some Members had argued that any issue could be discussed and that outcomes could be 
pushed through into the WTO framework without consensus, as long as they were provided on an 
MFN basis. The WTO was not just any organization, it was the international trade organization. If 
the new rules that were sought to be included were not development -oriented, they would have an 
impact on all Members. If JSIs were allowed, the WTO would effectively set standards for new trade 
rules, without a collective, multilateral agreement or oversight about these standards. This would 
have an impact on all Members  in the long run.  
8.72.   The representative of China  said that as a creative approach to negotiations, JSIs had brought 
new energy into the multilateral trading system, with increasing participation from Members. They 
were also essential to making the rules of in ternational trade responsive to the digital transformation 
of the global economy. Since their very beginning, JSIs had been strictly conducted in line with the 
WTO's principles of openness and transparency. China was of the view that JSI negotiations shoul d 
take into account the diversity of the Membership and their level of development, providing Members 
more comfort as to how and when to participate in JSIs.  
8.73.   China noted that the ultimate goal of the work at the WTO was to establish universally 
applicable  multilateral rules, rather than to be taken as a substitute for multilateralism. To this end, 
they saw a need to explore ways of better integrating JSI agreements into the WTO framework. In 
this regard, the paper helped Members to reflect upon those issue s. China believed that as long as 
the outcomes of JSIs benefitted Members as well as the organization, a solution would be found 
regarding their legal status.  
8.74.   The representative of Canada  disagreed with the argumentation presented in the paper. 
Plurilater als of all different kinds had been an essential part of the WTO and the GATT system before 
it. Interested Members had always had the right to discuss and negotiate trade -related issues in the 
WTO context. Canada supported the JSI model as it allowed inter ested Members an avenue to 
address pressing issues of common interest, including through the creation of rules when multilateral 
negotiations were not yet a viable alternative.  
8.75.   Existing JSIs were transparent, inclusive and open. The majority of WTO Members  were 
participating in at least one JSI, demonstrating the broad support for the approach among the 
Membership, including from developing Members.  
8.76.   The representative of El Salvador echoed the support expressed by other Members to the 
various JSIs that were  being negotiated at the WTO. They recalled the decades -long difficulties to 
achieve concrete outcomes and to make progress in terms of achieving new transparent and 
predictable multilateral trading rules. El Salvador was committed to the system and acknow ledged 
the importance of trade as a development tool. As such, plurilateral initiatives provided the WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 50 - 
 
  opportunity to continue to work on deepening rules on trade that were deemed important for JSI 
participants, while at the same time contributing to strengt hening the organization.  
8.77.   El Salvador was involved in the majority of the JSIs and was considering joining the others. 
Even as a small country, they co -sponsored the JSI on Trade and Gender, among others, since they 
were convinced that issues such as MSMEs , gender, e -commerce and investment facilitation would 
yield tangible benefits for all Members due to the MFN principle, including those that were not 
participating in the initiatives. JSI discussions were open to all Members, and  they invited those 
who h ad questions and concerns to join those discussions, so that they could ensure that their points 
of view would be duly taken into consideration.  
8.78.   El Salvador hoped for solid results from the JSIs in MC12; and stood ready to discuss the best 
way to address the topic of the legal vehicle to be used to integrate JSIs into the system of WTO 
rules.  
8.79.   The representative of Kazakhstan  noted that ongoing negotiations on the development of a 
new set of trade rules on Electronic Commerce, Investment Facilitatio n and Services Domestic 
Regulation that were taking place under JSIs, were fundamental to making WTO rules responsive to 
the challenges and needs of a modern global economy. Those new initiatives were also important 
for Members' efforts to combat unprecede nted economic challenges caused by the COVID -19 
pandemic and to sustain the global economic development.  
8.80.   Disciplines on Services Domestic Regulation, for example, were vital for the services sector, 
to ensure a predictable business climate and transparent procedures for trade in services. As a 
recently acceded WTO Member, Kazakhstan had made extensive and high -quality commitments in 
its accession package, including with respect to commitments on services market access, as 
compared to founding WTO Members. H ence, Kazakhstan believed that JSIs could also address the 
imbalance between WTO Members' commitments and provide a level playing field.   
8.81.   Kazakhstan also noted that plurilateral initiatives were not new to the WTO. The WTO 
framework had been updated throu gh key plurilateral agreements, such as the Government 
Procurement Agreement and the Information Technology Agreement. Thus, Kazakhstan was positive 
that Members could agree on ways to incorporate the outcomes of JSIs into the scope of the WTO 
in the diffe rent forms they could take; and encouraged Members to address their concerns in JSI 
negotiations in order to deliver meaningful results at MC12.   
8.82.   The representative of Thailand  said that they were a strong supporter of multilateral trade 
rulemaking, but r ecognized that, as a policy and rulemaking body, the WTO and its Members might  
be unable to stay ahead of new developments, new technologies and incumbent changes, not only 
as a result of the pandemic but also because of the technological developments that  were taking 
place in the world. They therefore called for ensuring that the WTO and its Members included 
rulemaking efforts to keep pace with changes in the world.  
8.83.   Thailand participated in some and not all of the JSIs, but did not doubt the legality or 
legitimacy of participating in JSI discussions. JSIs presented an opportunity to try to modernize 
existing WTO rules. At the same time, they did not attempt to undermine the importance of the 
multilateral trading system. JSIs would rather strengthen the syst em, making it more relevant and 
able to keep pace with other developments in the world. Thailand encouraged working collectively 
to reinforce the WTO's ability to respond to a changing context and to avoid that the WTO would fall 
into oblivion or would bec ome irrelevant in the global economy of the future.  
8.84.   Thailand recalled successful plurilateral initiatives such as the ITA, which many developing 
countries had joined and had benefited from its negotiations, including Thailand. Further, questioning 
the leg itimacy at this stage presupposed that plurilaterals such as the ITA were not legitimate.   
8.85.   The representative of the Republic of Moldova  said that her delegation participated in JSIs 
and had been a strong supporter of the initiation of their important wor k within the WTO since 2017. 
The activities of JSIs took place openly, inclusively and transparently, with voluntary engagement 
by Members. JSIs remained open to all Members at any stage. Moldova had participated and had 
closely followed the intense discus sions within all the JSIs. They acknowledged that the amount of WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 51 - 
 
  work and effort, professionalism and expertise that had been invested by Members in those 
discussions had been tremendous, inspiring and highly commendable.  
8.86.   Moldova had been and continued to b e fully committed to the rules -based multilateral trading 
system within the WTO. That commitment went hand in hand with their strong support for the need 
to preserve Members' rights to improve WTO commitments under the legal framework of the WTO, 
and in ke eping the organization relevant to the current realities of the 21st century.  
8.87.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the Pacific Group  noted that, noted that over 
recent years, they had seen the growing number of JSI initiatives in the WTO. As small Members 
with very small delegations, the Pacific Group had not been able to follow and participate in JSIs; it 
had been  very difficult and s ometimes impossible. The paper had raised important issues that 
needed to be clarified in terms of the relationship between JSIs and the multilateral rules. While they 
appreciated that some Members wanted to proceed at a faster pace than others, they calle d for 
ensuring that different speeds were legally accommodated within the multilateral rules, without 
undermining the fundamental principle of decision -making by consensus. They encouraged Members 
to engage in the paper.  
8.88.   The representative of Cameroon  took note of the legal issues contained in the paper. 
Cameroon was a strong supporter of multilateralism and understood that it was important to make 
the organization relevant and address new issues that were important to international trade, but 
weakening the  multilateral trading system and the WTO should be avoided.  
8.89.   The representative of South Africa  welcomed Namibia as a co -sponsor of the paper; and 
recalled their prior statement from March 2021. South Africa emphasized that the WTO had been 
established as the forum governing multilateral trade relations. Their fundamental interest in 
submitting the paper had been aimed at reminding Members of the legal architecture that governed 
the functioning of the WTO and to highlight the systemic importance of preservi ng its multilateral 
character, including the underpinning principles that should inform the incorporation of new rules in 
the WTO legal framework.  
8.90.   The multilateral character of the WTO and its scope was articulated in Article II.1 of the 
Marrakesh Agreemen t, stating that "[t]he WTO shall provide the common institutional framework 
for the conduct of trade relations among its Members in matters related to the agreements and 
associated legal instruments included in the Annexes to this Agreement." Article III.2  further 
provided that "[t]he WTO may also provide a forum for further negotiations among its Members 
concerning their multilateral trade relations (…)".  
8.91.   There was a difference between sectoral negotiations that changed schedules versus rules' 
negotiation s. The paper outlined the options that Members could consider in bringing new rules into 
the WTO, amendments to rules had to follow Article X of the Marrakesh Agreement. Each JSI would 
likely pose different legal challenges to existing WTO rules and mandat es, given the differences in 
the nature and scope of issues that were covered under each; the legal implications of which had 
been outlined in the paper.  
8.92.   Importantly, issues under JSIs had been proposed in the run up to the last Ministerial 
Conference. Th ey had not obtained consensus due to serious substantive concerns raised by many 
Members. JSIs did introduce new systemic and developmental challenges that the Membership had 
to reflect on: implications for decision making in the WTO and what their impact would be on the 
core principles of the WTO. They were concerned by the implications there would be on existing 
multilateral mandates that had been arrived at through consensus, in favour of matters without 
multilateral mandates; including the marginalisati on of issues which were difficult but yet critical for 
the multilateral trading system, such as agriculture and development; thereby undermining the 
balance in agenda setting, negotiating processes and outcomes.  
8.93.   South Africa reiterated that they did not qu estion the right of any group of Members to discuss 
any issue informally, but where such discussions turned into negotiations, and their outcomes were 
sought to be formalized into the WTO framework, that could only be done in accordance with the 
rules set out in the Marrakesh Agreement. In addition, their paper was not about the number of 
Members that participated in a specific initiative, but about the legal provisions that underpinned 
the functioning of the WTO, which had to be respected.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 52 - 
 
  8.94.   Regarding the IT A, they recalled that it did not amend GATT rules, and had been given legal 
effect through the amendment of schedules through a certification procedure, after negotiations with 
Members, and offered on an MFN basis. Regarding Basic Telecoms, they recalled t hat its negotiation 
and implementation had been explicitly mandated by the Ministerial Decision on Negotiations on 
Basic Telecoms, which had been adopted by consensus, with a specified mode of adoption, as part 
of the Uruguay Round.  
8.95.   With regards to the spe cific legal implications on services domestic regulations, Article VI.4 
of the GATS had entrusted the task of developing "any necessary disciplines" regarding domestic 
regulations to the Council for Trade in Services. The WTO's Working Party on Domestic Re gulation 
(WPDR) had been multilaterally mandated to undertake that work. At no time had there been a 
multilateral agreement to discontinue the mandate of the WPDR, or the mandate in Article VI.4 of 
the GATS. The JSI on Domestic Services Regulation thus sub verted the WPDR's multilateral mandate 
by not just undertaking exploratory discussions, but actually negotiating such disciplines through a 
parallel discussion format, designed to bypass the multilateral process.  
8.96.   Legal questions were important in a rules -based system, and they encouraged the 
Membership to engage in th ose legal and systemic questions as they stood to create issues going 
forward.  It was good to hear that the JSIs were also looking at issues of legal architecture. The 
need to deepen the mult ilateral discussion on those issues was not only timely but also important.  
8.97.   The General Council took note  of the statements6. 
9  GENERAL COUNCIL DECLARATION, TRADE AND HEALTH: COVID -19 AND BEYOND 
(JOB/GC/251/REV.1) – UPDATE FROM AUSTRALIA; BRAZIL; CANADA; CH ILE; CHINA; THE 
EUROPEAN UNION; HONG KONG, CHINA; ICELAND; JAPAN; KENYA; REPUBLIC OF KOREA; 
MEXICO; REPUBLIC OF MOLDOVA; MONTENEGRO; NEW ZEALAND; NORTH MACEDONIA; 
NORWAY; SINGAPORE; SWITZERLAND AND THE UNITED KINGDOM  
9.1.  The Chairman  recalled that the  item was included in the agenda by the co -sponsors of 
document JOB/GC/251/Rev.1.  
9.2.  The representative of Canada , on behalf of the 46 co -sponsors – counting the E uropean Union  
as 27 – of the General Council Declaration on Trade and Health: COVID -19 and Beyond,  provide d 
their common views on how the WTO should contribute to the fight against current and possible 
future pandemics. Developments around the world over the last few months and weeks ha d shown 
how pressing the need remain ed for Members'  coordina ted response to the COVID -19 crisis. 
International organizations need ed to take action. Global cooperation was imperative to ensure 
access to essential goods including therapeutics and vaccines. Such cooperation was needed at all 
levels – from the industry  and governments to international organizations working together.  
9.3.  In that global cooperation, the WTO ha d a role to play. As the event on Vaccine Equity organi zed 
by the Director -General on 14 April ha d shown, vaccine production need ed to be scaled up and 
vaccine distribution need ed to be made more equitable. There were several avenues to achieve th at 
and they include d increasing transparency of supply chains to tackle bottlenecks, streamlining 
customs procedures and eliminating export restrictions, among o thers. Transparency was one area 
where the WTO c ould contribute. Under the leadership of Dr Ngozi, the co -sponsors supported the 
pooling of expertise of different Geneva -based organizations to facilitate access to information so 
crucial in the event of a c risis and increase legal certainty.  
9.4.  In addition to th ose inter -institutional cooperation efforts, the WTO ha d a lot to do on its own. 
The co -sponsors had  already made a concrete proposal for a declaration entitled "COVID -19 and 
Beyond" circulated on 22 Apr il in document JOB/GC/251/Rev.1. The draft declaration include d 
various dimensions that they believe d should constitute a basis for further work and agreement 
among Members. Members  should make sure that governments d id not introduce unnecessary 
restrictio ns to trade in essential goods. In line with G -20 Declarations, the co -sponsor s consider ed 
 
6 At its reque st, the statement of the delegation of Colombia is incorporated in the Minutes of this General 
Council meeting and can be found in Annex 1 of this document.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 53 - 
 
  that restrictive measures, if necessary, should remain targeted, proportionate, transparent and 
temporary to avoid disruption of global supply chains.  
9.5.  As Members  strive d towards ensuring equitable access to vaccines across the globe, they 
should  also ensure that the COVAX Facility c ould operate unimpeded by trade restricting measures. 
Members  should also intensify the work in the different WTO Committees to  seek solutions for the 
challenges posed by the pandemic. For instance, the work already undertaken in the Trade 
Facilitation Committee was a good example. Members  should accelerate the implementation of the 
TFA and share best practices on measures taken d uring th e pandemic . Members should build on 
that. The co -sponsors we re ready to further engage and refine their thinking. But it was the co -
sponsors' collective view that such initiatives could combine with other efforts and provide realistic 
and reasonabl e means to contribute to the fight against the current pandemic and create the 
conditions for better addressing future ones.  
9.6.  Since the previous General Council meeting, seven additional Members ha d decided to actively 
support this initiative, namely, China; Hong Kong, China; Iceland; the Republic of Moldova; 
Montenegro; North Macedonia and the United Kingdom. The co -sponsors  warmly welcome d them 
for joining this effort. Together, counting the E urope an Union  as 27, they represent ed almost a third 
of the WTO % reflecting a variety of domestic situations. The 46 co -sponsors of the Trade and Health 
Initiative were calling on the rest of the WTO Members to also join th e effort for a successful outcome 
on Trade and Health as soon as possible. In that regard, the co -sponsors  welcome d the recent 
expressions of support. Members should grasp th e opportunity to show the relevance and importance 
of the WTO doing what it c ould to support the global fight against t he pandemic.  
9.7.  On behalf of Canada , he said that, irrespective of parallel developments, it remain ed imperative 
that Members ma de every effort to ensure the frictionless movement of vaccines and other medical 
supplies. This Trade and Health Initiative provid ed realistic and reasonable means to support their 
collective fight against the current pandemic and create the conditions for better addressing future 
crises.  
9.8.  The representative of Colombia  reiterated his delegation's  general position of support for the 
initiative and was ready to contribute to its discussion hand in hand with the growing number of 
sponsors. Under item 11 on vaccines that Colombia together with other Members had requested to 
be added in the General Cou ncil's agenda, Colombia would provide a more detailed statement on 
the multidimensional nature of the trade and health issue and on the need to address various 
additional matters. Members could count on Colombia to contribute to future discussions in that 
regard.  
9.9.  The representative of Iceland  associated with the statement of the co -sponsors of the Trade 
and Health Initiative.  The COVID -19 pandemic ha d taught Members  that in times of global health 
crisis, enhanced trade policy cooperation among th e Membershi p took on increased importance. 
Trade restrictive measures should  be kept to the absolute minimum. What was needed was to ensure 
efficient and predictable flows of essential medical goods across borders to fight th e pandemic and 
any future health crisis. Iceland  particularly highlight ed the declaration's emphasis on clear 
disciplines on export restrictions of essential medical supplies to combat COVID -19. Far from being 
necessary especially during the current situation, such measures create d uncertainty, di srupted 
supply chains and tend ed to have a disproportionately worse impact on smaller States. Any 
implementation of trade restrictions affecting the response to COVID -19 should therefore be 
temporary, transparent, justified and in line with WTO obligations . Iceland  remind ed Members that 
had not yet done so to co -sponsor the declaration.  
9.10.   The representative of New Zealand  noted that,  as an original co -sponsor of the draft 
declaration, New Zealand strongly support ed this declaration for all the reasons set out by Canada. 
New Zealand  also noted India's reference earlier t hat day to the statement by the US Trade 
Representative, H.E. Katherine Tai , and  drew attention to another statement from New Zealand's 
Minister for Trade and Export Growth, H.E. Damien O'Connor, in which he had expressed that New 
Zealand welcome d and strongly support ed the announcement made by the USTR to work for a 
waiver of IP protections on COVID -19 vaccines at the WTO. New Zealand  looked forward t o taking 
this work forward with urgency.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 54 - 
 
  9.11.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  was pleased to join as a co -sponsor of this draft 
declaration  and thank ed fellow co -sponsors for their ongoing outreach efforts and other Members 
for sharing their valuable vie ws and comments. As Canada ha d already recalled the salient elements 
of the draft declaration, Hong Kong, China highlight ed that, in the face of a global pandemic, it was 
crucial for Members to work in a coordinated and collaborative manner.  They needed to  demonstrate 
to stakeholders worldwide that the WTO was relevant and responsive to the most pressing issues.  
The draft declaration w ould bring Members  closer to that common goal. Hong Kong, China strongly 
support ed the draft declaration and  called on othe r Members to also consider joining.  
9.12.   The representative of the Russian Federation  welcome d all efforts undertaken at both national 
and international levels to curb the negative impact of the COVID -19 pandemic. With the  proliferation 
of Trade and Health Init iatives in the WTO , the Russian Federation hoped  that th e exercise w ould 
lead to tangible outcomes. At the same time, every Member should try to deliver its concrete input 
in the fight against COVID -19. Russian research institutions were creating a series of COVID -19 
vaccines. Three of them ha d already been registered in Russi a and two of them – Sputnik V and 
EpiVacCorona – had been produced in large quantities by its pharmaceutical companies and were 
being used for vaccination. Contracts with foreign manufacturers who w ould be producing its 
vaccine s on their territory ha d been signed for a quantity of doses enough to vaccinate 700 million 
people per year. To meet the global demand for its vaccine, the Russian Federation  was working on 
transferring technology abroad. The Russian Federation  had agreements on this with manufacture rs 
in ten countries. Russia had been  the only country to have come up with the offer to build production 
partnerships with various countries with their transfer of technology.  
9.13.   From the very beginning, Russia ha d sought to establish wide -ranging internatio nal 
cooperation not only in the creation of vaccines but also in the ir provision to the world's population  
to overcome the pandemic as promptly as possible. Active international cooperation in the fight 
against the pandemic was a common good – a pre -requis ite for the re -launching of the world 
economy and trade. Russia associate d with the statements on refraining from  imposing trade 
restrictions on essential medical goods to ensure access to th ese goods, to facilitate its 
transportation and customs clearance  and to ensure access to finance to purchase these goods 
through any channels. The Russian Federation strongly discourage d Members from introducing trade 
restrictive measures particularly when it came  to access to vaccines. In respect of considerations for  
MC12, the Russian Federation st ood ready to engage in the respective discussions.  
9.14.   The representative of India said that, w hile certain measures highlighted in the submissions 
which c ould help in keeping the supply chains open in the transportation of raw materials and 
distribution of final goods were welcome, th ose were just one part of the solution. In its discussions 
with the co -sponsors, India had highlighted some of the priorities which could have been part of 
those submissions. India would have appreciated the co -sponsors' support on the waiver proposal 
which would have matched their words in letter and spirit to contribute to a successful fi ght against 
COVID -19 – India's submission – through concrete action. Addressing IP challenges was a pre -
requisite if Members  were to meet the objective of vaccinating the global population in the shortest 
possible timeframe.  
9.15.   While highlighting preventing f urther disruptions in the supply chains of essential medical 
goods, the submission misse d out a very significant element of COVID -19 response. It talk ed about 
facilitating movements of goods including medical products,  but it was silent on facilitating 
movement of healthcare and other professionals and liberali sing measures on that front. 
Negotiations on new WTO commitments in terms of movement of healthcare professionals including 
doctors, nurses, paramedics, radiologists, surgeons, dentists and physiother apists, among others, 
by lowering the barriers, eliminating the restrictions in qualification requirements and procedures, 
cross-border recognition of professional qualifications, harmonization of entry requirements and 
easing the entry procedures, among o thers, should also be simultaneously explored with the aim of 
concluding such negotiations as part of this initiative.  
9.16.   On export restrictions, it was a dual use policy tool. During the pandemic where Members  
were not working in a perfect market condition, India had used this tool for ensuring equitable 
distribution of critical supplies, medicines, diagnostic kits, ventilators, PPEs and vaccines to more 
than 150 countries based on mutually assessed needs. In the absence of this tool, the entire supply 
could  have been cornered by the rich and privileged with deep pockets. On cooperation of the WTO 
with other organizations, India was willing to discuss it further with the proponents. Any binding 
measures on additional transparency proposed in the paper w ould only come in the way of successful WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 55 - 
 
  integration of trade and health , particularly during the pandemic. Members  needed to be mindful 
that lives and livelihoods were being lost while they continue d to debate  the WTO's response to the 
pandemic. They should  take a realistic and pragmatic action to protect the credibility of the WTO.  
9.17.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  thank ed Canada and other sponsors for  the Trade and 
Health proposal and for their earnest outreach after the last General Council meeting.  Chinese Taipei  
share d the aims of the proposal and believe d the proposed actions or policy recommendations were 
valuable in guiding Members to collectivel y tackle trade issues arising from th e crisis.  Chinese Taipei 
was pleased  to co-sponsor the proposal  and looked forward to contributing to future discussions.   
9.18.   On a related issue, as mentioned at the TNC meeting on 3 May , Members should  
comprehensively add ress various trade -related aspects arising from COVID -19 to show the world 
that the WTO was relevant and able to deliver concrete actions to respond to the most urgent 
challenge facing the whole of humanity today.  In this context, Chinese Taipei  had circul ated a 
proposal on a "Ministerial Declaration on Combating, Mitigating and Recovering from the Impacts of 
COVID -19 and Beyond " in document JOB/GC/256.  Chinese Taipei  hoped that not only the most 
urgent aspect of combating COVID -19 was tackled but also that the mitigating and recovering 
aspects were also considered and addressed at the same time.  
9.19.   On the combating aspect, Chinese Taipei  had suggested in document JOB/GC/256 that 
Members need ed to decide either improving the 2001 TRIPS Declaration or adopting c ertain 
additional decisions , such as having certain additional waivers , to cope with the current pandemic. 
Combating COVID -19 was about saving lives  and was of extreme urgency. In this regard, Chinese 
Taipei  was pleased to see development recently on the TRIPS waiver discussion  and looked forward 
to reading the new text to be submitted by India, South Africa and other proponent s for further 
discussion.  In addition to combating COVID -19 to save lives, the mitigati ng and recovering efforts 
were saving and restoring the livelihood of the most vulnerable people and sectors. Th ose were of 
no less importance than combating the coronavirus.  Chinese Taipei  would work with Members on 
how to address th ose three aspects of c ombating, mitigating and recovering from the impacts of 
COVID -19 at the same time. Chinese Taipei  also urge d Members to work together to deliver a 
meaningful outcome on COVID -19 issues even as early as in the July Ministerial Meeting.  
9.20.   The representative of  the Republic of Korea  noted that it was  difficult to think of an issue that 
was more critical to ensuring the relevance of the WTO to the everyday lives of ordinary people than 
that. Korea welcome d the new co -sponsors to th at initiative  and reiterate d how critical it was for 
vital medical supplies to flow unimpeded and for global supply chains to be protected as Members  
tackle d COVID -19. Disruptions in supply chains for essential medical goods ha d a direct impact on 
people's lives. The WTO should  do its pa rt to help fight the pandemic by facilitating trade in and 
protecting supply chains for essential medical goods. Th at should  be among its top priority. As the 
co-sponsor of the Trade and Health Initiative, Korea call ed on others who ha d yet to join to support 
the Trade and Health Initiative and the Declaration. In addition to th at initiative, more need ed to be 
done. Every effort should  be made to scale up vaccine production to ensure that they were promptly 
delivered to where they were needed. Korea  also thank ed Dr Ngozi for her leadership on th at issue 
including at the vaccine equity event in April . 
9.21.   The representative of Mexico  said that, i n the context of the biggest health crisis in recent 
times and the most severe economic and trade c risis since the Great Depression, MC12 g ave 
Members  an excellent opportunity for the WTO to demonstrate its relevance and its responsibility to 
the international community. Canada's submission provide d them, in a first phase, with an 
opportunity to act imm ediately and responsibly to increase the efficiency of the trade flow of goods 
that were essential for combatting the current pandemic. In a second phase, it g ave them the 
possibility, based on its effectiveness, to discuss possible new permanent commitmen ts for those 
who were in a position to undertake them. Mexico  therefore welcome d the new co -sponsors and 
urged Members to give positive consideration to th e communication.  
9.22.   The representative of the United States  appreciate d the efforts of the Ottawa Group to 
highlight some of the challenges affecting trade in medical products and welcome d the opportunity 
for Members to focus on how trade c ould contribute to solutions. Th at work ha d fostered additional 
ideas, and the United States  was also reviewing the recent proposal from Chinese Taipei. The United 
States  recogni zed that several WTO Committees were also focused on efforts to facilitate the free 
flow of medical products and support ed those efforts. For example, in the Trade Facilitati on 
Committee, Members were  discussing a proposal with 15 co -sponsors to accelerate implementation WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 56 - 
 
  of key provisions of the Trade Facilitation Agreement. Implementation of th ose provisions would 
rapidly facilitate the timely and efficient release of health and medical supplies needed to combat 
COVID -19. The provisions most likely to produce results involve d pre-arrival processing, expedited 
shipments, reduction of formalities and documentation requirements and publication.  
9.23.   There were more trade facilitating ideas to discuss that went beyond what was contained in 
the TFA. The United States  welcome d a discussion on how to improve transparency. It should start 
with a conversation about how Members ' transparency ha d fallen short during the pandemic. A 
recent Secr etariat report in G/MA/W/168  had noted that as of April, 29 Members had notified a total 
of 48 export restrictive measures during the pandemic.  The Secretariat had added that ten more 
Members had introduced export restrictive measures but had not notif ied them. As Members, they 
could examine those ten cases and determine how Members c ould improve in the future. The United 
States  support ed Member -driven efforts to increase transparency  and continue d to support the G20 
pledge that export restrictions should  be "targeted, proportionate, transparent, and temporary ".  
9.24.   That said, with the apparent exception of the ten examples cited by the Secretariat, the United 
States had not been able to identify export restrictions that would run afoul of th at pledge. Back at 
home, analytic work continue d under President Biden 's Executive Order on a Sustainable Public 
Health Supply Chain as well as the Executive Order on America 's Supply  Chains. The United States 
would look for opportunities to incorporate what it could learn in  the work at the WTO. In summary, 
the United States looked forward to working with other Members to understand specific challenges 
currently affecting supply chain s in essential goods, and to take action to address those challenges 
at the WTO, where appropriate.  
9.25.   The representative of Uruguay  noted that the  draft declaration addresse d some of the 
essential elements which s ought  to improve equitable access to COVID -19 vaccines and 
therapeutics. Uruguay w ould continue to follow the initiative with interest and was in favour of 
continuing discussions on the draft declaration.  
9.26.   The representative of Chile welcome d Members that  had recently joined the initiative  and was 
certain that they w ould contribute positively to the discussions. Some of the conclusion s reached in 
the initiative concerned the relevance of trade and health in terms of confronting some of the 
challenges faced in improving production and distribution of CO VID-19 vaccines and therapeutics as 
well as essential goods, facilitating their transit, ensuring that supply chains c ould fully operate, 
facilitating customs procedures and addressing export restrictions, among others. The WTO should 
be able to address such issues because they were well within its competency. Members  could not 
evade their responsibility. In December, Members  should  address th at initiative in the short -term 
and provide a work programme with mid to long -term actions to confront future pandemics.  
9.27.   The representative of Turkey  said that t he discussions Members  had been having since the 
start of the pandemic demons trated how critical trade c ould be for public health objectives. When 
the objectives they aimed for were at global level , so should be their methods to reach them. As 
Members  went through th ose critical times, the WTO should continue to guide them in keepi ng 
international trade open. In th at respect, Turkey along with some Members had sponsored a 
communication to support the engagement of the Director -General with vaccine developers and 
vaccine manufacturers to facilitate and promote mutually beneficial sol utions which could  include 
transfer of expertise, know -how and technology. Turkey  was pleased that D r Ngozi  Okonjo -Iweala 
had been leading th ose efforts for some time.  Turkey  welcome d recent supportive announcements 
with regard to the waiver of intellectua l property rights on vaccines. As highlighted the previous day , 
Turkey  was looking forward to working on the revised text which w ould be presented soon by the 
co-sponsors of the waiver proposal. The communication on Trade and Health suggest ed certain 
possible actions in the field of export restrictions, trade facilitation, technical regulations, tariffs and 
transparency. Turkey  was ready to engage in the discussions on th ose elements. Going through th e 
communication, it was  clear that trade restrictive measures in critical supplies should always be 
avoided. That kind of action w ould only result in a domino effect of protectionism which w ould 
eventually benefit no one.  
9.28.   The representative of Norway  welcome d China ; Hong Kong, China ; Iceland ; the Republic of  
Moldova ; Montenegro ; North Macedonia and the United Kingdom as co -sponsors. Norway 
encourage d other Members to join the initiative and t o engage constructively in taking th e initiative 
forward with the aim to have a robust outcome on trade and health at MC12.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 57 - 
 
  9.29.   The representative of the Republic of Moldova  joined as a co -sponsor  and supported  the 
declaration. Moldova thank ed Canada and the European Union along with other proponents for their 
leadership on th e initiative , which consolidate d important elements and set a good basis for 
Members ' collaborative, non -prescriptive actions , intended to facilitate trade in essential medical 
goods and improve the capacity of the trading system in response to the fight against COVID -19 
and beyond. Moldova  supported the declaration  which contain ed elements on export restrictions, 
customs practic es on trade facilitation, enhancing transparency particularly on COVID -19 related 
measures undertaken by Members, and cooperation with other organizations. All of th ose were in 
line with Moldova's activities within the relevant WTO bodies and with its current national policy 
priorities. Moldova  stood ready to contribute in the future with constructive engagement on the 
implementation of the elements of th e declaration along with other co -sponsors.  
9.30.   The representative of Indonesia  reiterate d that the WTO need ed a holistic approach in 
addressing the global public health crisis stemming from the COVID -19 pandemic. Many of the 
actions were important tools to address trade barriers for health products. Indonesia also note d that 
any targeted, proportionate, transpa rent and temporary measures taken due to extreme urgency 
could  be undertaken by any Member to preserve their immediate needs in times of public health 
crisis. Such actions in the proposal ha d their own limitations and could not address the immediate 
global  problem on access to COVID -19 vaccines, diagnostics and other medical products. Key action 
impacting the COVID -19 pandemic should  be concentrated in addressing the issue of artificial 
scarcity and inequality of access in particular vaccines. Indonesia  looked forward to the co -sponsors 
ensur ing that the proposal could also incorporate action s to address the inequality of access and 
artificial scarcity emanating from trade rules.   
9.31.   The representative of the United Kingdom  noted that i t would be unimaginable that Ministers 
would wish to come to MC12 in the midst of th at awful pandemic and not make a substantive 
statement on health issues. Members  needed to show that the WTO c ould deliver results people 
expect ed on those sorts of issues. The United  Kingdom  had joined th e proposal because it s ought  to 
tackle the severe disruption to global trade that ha d arisen from the use of export restrictions and 
other barriers to COVID -19 critical products. In th at critical moment in the fight against COVID -19, 
Members c ould help ensure vital supplies including vaccines g et to those who most need ed them by 
keeping th ose medical supply chains open. The United Kingdom  encourage d other Members to join 
the proposal and send a powerful political signal that together they were all playing their part in the 
fight against COVID -19 by keeping trade flowing. In line with the pr inciples of th e initiative, the 
United Kingdom  had for its own part already taken steps to implement the commitments regarding 
tariff liberalization and its approach to export restrictions on COVID -19 critical goods – something it 
had done since January. The United Kingdom looked forward to working with colleagues , both co -
sponsors and others , on the proposal in the lead up to MC12 to seek more resilient supply chains – 
not just as a defence against the COVID -19 pandemic but also as an insurance policy agai nst future 
pandemics and to show that working together, they could and w ould build back better and stronger.  
9.32.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , supported all calls to limit restrictions on 
access to medical equipment, supplies and medicines  needed to combat COVID -19, in particular 
access to those products in LDCs. The whole world had suffered and continued to suffer. The 
pandemic had wreaked havoc around the globe. Developed and developing countries were not 
producing sufficient amounts of t hose supplies. As for LDCs, they were hoping to increase their 
capacity and their technological progress. The LDCs had recently made a commitment with the 
Technology Bank for Least Developed Countries to support their countries in enhancing their own 
skills and technologies to develop masks, for example. In that regard, the LDC Group commended 
the Executive Director of the Technology Bank for Least Developed Countries for his recent actions 
on their behalf. Despite those efforts, LDCs were the most seriousl y affected and they were far from 
being able to address those gaps and respond to the capacity needs of their countries. It should be 
noted that the LDC Group had supported the proposals on access to vaccines, including on TRIPS.  
9.33.   The representative of Nigeria said that COVID -19 ha d a negative impact on lives and livelihood 
globally . Targeted trade policies and international trade rules could support COVID -19 containment 
efforts, build resilient health sectors and contribute to economic recovery. Nigeria had  implemented 
unilateral temporal suspension of tariff s on essential medical products needed to combat COVID -19 
and had streamlined customs procedures relat ed to the importation of th ose products. Export 
restrictions placed on diagnostics, therapeutics and vaccines needed to combat COVID -19 by some 
developed countries had undermined access to th ose products to developing countries. The proposal  
however  only p resent ed a piecemeal approach to addressing the challenges  posed by COVID -19 to WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 58 - 
 
  lives and livelihood . While t he proposal was geared towards a possible MC12 decision on adoptin g 
market opening commitments regarding trade in essential medical goods, th e WTO should explore 
ways of addressing supply gap which was the core problem  – since tariff was not a barrier to trade 
in essential medical goods in times of pandemic , as countries unilaterally dismantle d tariffs to 
safeguard the lives of their citizens. The di fficulties rested  with the huge and ever -increasing 
therapeutics and vaccines supply -demand  gap and the solution ha d to do with Members'  ability to 
ramp up production of th ose products in developing countries. It was in view of this that Nigeria  had 
co-sponsored the proposal for a waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the 
prevention, containment and treatment of COVID -19 in document IP/C/W/669. The adoption of th e 
waiver w ould enable Members  to holistically address the difficulties th at the draft declaration on 
Trade and Health s ought  to partially address a nd underpin the building of a pandemic resilient health 
sector in developing countries.  
9.34.   The representative of China  noted that  COVID -19 cases and deaths around the world were 
continu ing to increase rapidly. The worrying figures show ed that there was still a long way to go to 
end the C OVID -19 pandemic and the WTO should  play a more important role in fighting against the 
current pandemic and get prepared for any future pandemic. In th at regard, China  saw great value 
in the Trade and Health Initiative , which provide d a good basis for Members to discuss and work out 
possible outcome s before or at MC12. It also cover ed the important areas that Dr Ngozi had 
highlighted at the COVID -19 and Vaccine Equity meeting , such as reducing export restrictions and 
facilitating logistics and customs procedures. China  encourage d all Members to actively participate 
in the discussion on the initiative and welcome d any new areas to be included in the initiative. China 
stood ready to work together with all Members to come up with a concrete outcome at MC12.  
9.35.   The representative of Fiji recogni zed the initiative  as an avenue to address specific trade 
concerns related to the public health measures po sed by the C OVID -19 pandemic. Fiji thank ed the 
proponents for the bilateral consultations with the Pacific Group and was  carefully assessing the 
utility of the proposal at th at stage. Fiji would be happy to come back for further clarifications  and 
for any specific observation.  
9.36.   The representative of Bangladesh  associated  with the statement of the LDC Group. The 
communication highlight ed the urgency to help each other during a global crisis. LDCs suffer ed the 
most in the face of any disaster whether  global, r egional or local. The ongoing pandemic ha d 
multiplied their sufferings. The most urgent issue was to stop the virus by ensuring easy and 
affordable access to vaccines and essential medical and pharmaceuticals products for everyone 
everywhere in the world. Bangladesh thank ed the proponents for recogni sing th at human urgency, 
both for the present and future, beyond the existing pandemic. Bangladesh however hope d that 
such proposals w ould not be tied up with any conditionality in the future. Members need ed more 
clarity on several expressions contained in th e document , such as  emerging best practices, new WTO 
commitments  and the period of validity for export restriction , to name a few.  Bangladesh look ed 
forward to engaging constructively on th e issue.   
9.37.   The representative of Barbados  said that, i n the spirit of the current moment of the global 
reality, th e initiative was timely. Th at was one in a series of complementary proposals on COVID -
19, which was currently under discussion in various WTO Bodies including the General Council and 
the TRIPS Council. While some of the measures taken by Members in the name of COVID -19 ha d 
been trade restrictive and Barbados  had urged Members to reverse th ose temporary measures as 
soon as possible, many of the measures imposed ha d also been trade facilitating. There was nothing 
deterring Members from converting their trade facilitating measures into permanent measures if 
those individual Members so decide d. Barbados  would however be concerned if Members had then 
been mandated to agree to enhance commitment in the areas that ha d been proposed by the co -
sponsors in their draft. Members should  examine th e draft decision carefully. Their individual ability 
to effectively recover from the pandemic w ould depend on their collective ability overall. Th at was 
not meant to be a soundbite for the records  of the meeting but a factual and principled representation 
of the current reality. It was only through international effort that  they would ensure equitable access 
to vaccines. Such noble and humane causes d id not allow for vaccine nationalism  but create d the 
impetus for them as global citizens to be their brothers' and sisters' keeper.  
9.38.   In the WT O, it create d the opportunity for Members  to exercise political leadership. As 
Dr Ngozi ha d been saying for quite some time, once they could sit down with an actual text in front 
of them, they should find a pragmatic way forward , acceptable to all sides , that allow ed the kind of 
answers that developing Members were looking at with respect to vaccines , while at the same time WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 59 - 
 
  looking at the issue of research and innovation and how to protect them. Members  had a moral 
imperative to do th at. In th e past 24 hour s, Members  had gotten a signal that more of them were 
willing to come to the WTO to be able to find a durable solution to vaccine equity. Barbados 
commend ed the United States for showing the moral leadership to enter into text -based negotiations 
on the rev ised text of the TRIPS Waiver proposal. Such a commitment and leadership in th at direction 
augur ed well for discussion on the reversal of trade restrictions that block ed equitable access to 
COVID -19 vaccines. The onus was on Members  to drive the organization to play its part in the 
COVID -19 fight. Barbados, as always, st ood ready to engage in any and all ways necessary.  
9.39.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the Paci fic Group , noted that COVID -19 was 
unprecedented,  and its effects ha d been felt in all countries and in all regions. A declaration on Trade 
and Health w ould be an important response to th at and future pandemics. The draft General Council 
Declaration outlin ed five measures which Members c ould take to combat the ongoing pandemic and 
to respond to future pandemics. Most of th ose elements were not new and stem med from existing 
WTO Agreements. The prompt notification would ensure transparency of trade measures i mposed 
by Members and should be encouraged. Trade facilitation was an important response to the 
pandemic to facilitate the efficient distribution of essential goods as the Pacific Group  had 
experienced through its region's facilitation mechanism , which had enabled a smooth and efficient 
distribution of essential medical supplies and equipment to Pacific Members. On export restrictions, 
the situation of import dependent Members such as those in the Pacific Group should be taken into 
account in th e draft deci sion to ensure they were not denied the supply of essential products during 
times of health crisis. The Pacific Group was open to engage in the discussions on th e draft decision.   
9.40.   The representative of South Africa  referred to its statement on the matter at the G eneral 
Council  meetings in December and in March . Past experiences ha d shown that critical success factors 
while in the middle of a health crisis were speed, sharing of knowledge and know -how and supporting 
global solutions that were equitable, inclusive and timely. South Africa  thank ed the U nited States  
for its announcement to support the TRIPS waiver and  text-based negotiations. South Africa also  
thank ed New Zealand for its support and look ed forward to more Members coming on board o n that 
important initiative that aim ed to boost supply and ensure equitable access.  Members  agree d that 
the biggest challenge they faced in the fight against the COVID -19 pandemic was limited supply and 
that there was need to ramp  up production. The meetin g convened  by Dr Ngozi  had been  helpful in 
confirming the existence of underutilized manufacturing capacity available in developing countries 
that c ould contribute to the solution  – which was again  confirmed by Dr Ngozi during the meeting . 
All Members  seem ed to recognize the role of the transfer  of IP, technology and know -how to boost 
and diversify global production, including in developing countries. Th at opened scope for Members 
to come together and engage in good  faith and solution -oriented discussions t owards a balanced 
outcome that addresse d the interests of all. Th at sent the right message that the WTO was capable 
of delivering in the interest of humanity. A global challenge require d a global solution.   
9.41.   On the Trade and Health Initiative, there were some useful elements such as cooperation 
among international organi zations that South Africa  could consider in looking at a WTO response to 
COVID -19. It was certainly problematic that some countries were hoardin g doses a nd critical vaccine 
supplies for their own domestic population. A commitment to release th ose doses and end vaccine 
nationalism was critical to an effective response. Importantly, a focus on export restrictions while 
important , was not sufficient.  The more sustainable solution was global cooperation to boost supply 
and get the jabs on people s' arms to reach global immunity , and th at require d sharing of IP, 
technology, know -how as proposed in the TRIPS Waiver. The Trade and Health Initiative focuse d on 
trade -related aspects which were not sufficient when the core problem was production. Some of the 
proposals venture d into trade liberalization which South Africa  found problematic in the context of a 
crisis. Africa,  according to the CDC, had  import ed 99% of its vaccines. A continent of 1.2 billion 
people should not have to import 99% of its vaccines.  Africa  would need all the policy tools to 
address th at serious strategic vulnerability. South Africa  would also be concerned with a proposal 
that unilatera l trade facilitative measures implemented in the context of th e crisis should  be 
converted into permanent commitments. On transparency, t he biggest  challenge was transparency 
of contracts and price stability undertakings. The secrecy in voluntary license agreements  implie d 
information asymmetry , which work ed to the detriment of developing countries that ended up paying 
higher prices with terms and conditions that  worked to the disadvantage of public health.  
9.42.   The representative of Japan  said that, u nder the C OVID -19 crisis, it was critical to maintain 
and reinforce  relevant supply chains. That was key to enabling every country, including developing 
ones, to have acc ess to vaccines and other essential medical goods. Th e initiative not only set out WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 60 - 
 
  to address the current crisis but also to ensure that Members  were prepared for potential future 
pandemics. It was extremely important to ensure that the WTO c ould function effectively as an 
organization in response to the demands of the times. An important part of th e initiative w ould be 
work such as clarifying the export restrictions discipline. As Dr Ngozi  had emphasized, it was 
imperative that the WTO produce a deliverabl e in the area of trade and health at MC12  and t he 
initiative c ould constitute a key part of  it. Japan  welcome d the seven new co -sponsors and hope d 
that more Members w ould join by becoming co -sponsors of the draft General Council Declaration.  
9.43.   The representative of Pakistan  recall ed its statements under th e agenda item in previous 
meetings of the General Council  and would like to  develop a better understanding of the fundamental 
thrust of the proposal on several counts . As a whole , the proposed measures d id not address the 
core problems particularly faced by developing countries at present . The proposal carrie d measures 
that cater ed generally to trade liberalization, policy and regulatory restriction, and transparency 
objectives. Th ose elements were already covered in several places in WTO agreements and principles 
in various forms such as transparency, trade facilitation  and tariff reduction , among others . The 
paper therefore add ed little value. Moreover, new obligations for reporting, transparen cy, monitoring 
and review hardly d id anything to fight the current health crisis the world was confronted with.  It 
rather added  more burden on developing countries with poor capacities and infrastructure. It was 
therefore difficult to fathom how th ose prop osals were actually meant to combat the pandemic.  
9.44.   Pakistan  agree d with co -sponsors in their desire for cooperation to "meet the unprecedented 
challenges of ensuring availability of essential medical goods, including vaccines, in these turbulent 
times ". It was extremely ironic that th is came at a time when the monopolistic and profiteering 
tendencies of large pharmaceutical companies, and vaccine hoarding in countries that ha d developed 
vaccines , had caused vaccine famine in poorer developing countries. It was even more ironic that 
some countries asking for no export restrictions, technical cooperation and collaboration between 
international organizations in th e proposal were also the ones imposing export restrictions on 
vaccines, unwilling to share technology and technical know -how and paying no heed to the calls of 
the most relevant international organization on health matters  – the WHO. Pakistan  invite d the 
proponents, as they were rightly motivated by the need for the WTO to do something on health  and 
the pandemic , to join text -based negotiations on the TRIP S waiver  and welcome d the statement of 
the USTR and as informed by Ambassador Walker, by New Zealand,  to join text -based negotiations.  
9.45.   The representative of Kazakhstan  welcome d the proposal made  by Canada and co -sponsors 
that highlight ed the importance of ensuring the steady flow of essential goods through eliminating 
unnecessary barriers to trade including export restrictions and sharing good practices on trade 
facilitation, technical requiremen ts and enhancing transparency on measures adopted in the context 
of the pandemic. The WTO ha d a valuable role to play in ensuring supply chains for critical medical 
supplies and equitable access to vaccines as they create d conditions for a stable, predicta ble and 
transparent trade environment for critical goods. In that regard, Kazakhstan  support ed the 
constructive dialogue led by Dr Ngozi with Members and companies that were producing vaccines , 
and Members that were in need of affordable vaccines. Members should learn from their experiences 
in dealing with the COVID -19 crisis and take proactive steps to ensure that the multilateral trading 
system was better equipped to deal with future health emergencies. Kazakhstan st ood ready to take 
part in the discussio n of the initiative and strongly support ed a meaningful multilateral outcome on 
trade and health at MC12.  
9.46.   The representative of Singapore  noted that  the Trade and Health Declaration represent ed a 
concrete initiative that w ould enable the WTO to make a mean ingful contribution to the global fight 
against the COVID -19 pandemic. It was not meant to be the panacea to solve all current challenges 
in addressing the COVID -19 pandemic.  The declaration was pragmati c and set out practical actions 
that Members c ould take to facilitate trade in diagnostics, vaccines and therapeutics. It focuse d on 
the real -life problems that ha d been identified by the key stakeholders including vaccine developers 
and manufacturers. If Members were serious in ramping up vaccine pro duction, it was important for 
them to consider what they c ould contribute rather than focus on what they c ould take from the 
system. The declaration t ook a long -term perspective. While it s ought  to address the immediate 
problem of blockages in the flow of essential medical supplies during the COVID -19 pandemic, the 
Trade and Health Initiative was also intended to ensure that the WTO was able to respond to future 
pandemics. Hence, Singapore  encourage d all Members to support th e declaration and refrain from 
attempting to inject narrow priorities into th at important initiative.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 61 - 
 
  9.47.   The representative of  the European Union  thank ed Canada for presenting the  proposal which 
the European Union co -sponsor ed. The challenges that Members  were facing were multiple and 
compl ex. The proposal addresse d many of the issues that a number of the participants including 
those involved in producing or delivering vaccines ha d identified at the event on vaccine equity of 
14 April. There was high value in considering the different elemen ts of the proposal. The pandemic 
was unprecedented and w ould not be solved by addressing only one single issue. Th at was why the 
European Union also support ed the third way that Dr Ngozi  was proposing, whose object was to 
work with companies to ramp up the production and distribution of vaccines. The European Union 
took note of the position that the United States ha d expressed on a TRIPS waiver. The European 
Union w ould be ready to assess how the US proposal could support ramping up the production of 
vaccines and their distribution. Th at was the biggest challenge that Members  needed to address 
together. They needed a holistic and collective approach.  
9.48.   The representative of Canada  thank ed all those who had intervened t hat day in the discussion 
of the import ant initiative. In particular, Canada  thank ed Chinese Taipei for indicat ing its intention 
to join in th at work.  Canada was also informed that Brunei Darussalam ha d expressed its desire to 
co-sponsor the initiative and welcome d them as well. The co -sponsors  would continue engaging with 
Members and st ood ready to refine their thinking. In the end, it was the co -sponsors' collective view 
that the initiative provide d a realistic and reasonable means to contribute to the fight against the 
current pandemic and cr eated conditions for better addressing future ones.  
9.49.   The Chairman  said that, a s delegations ha d noted, and as he had  also said earlier under a 
different item, issues related to the recovery from the health crisis were of the utmost importance, 
in particular as Members  looked ahead at MC12. Several delegations ha d stressed that MC12 should  
provide a solid response to the  pandemic. For that to be possible, Members  should be ready to 
discuss, listen and engage constructively with each other.  
9.50.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
10  PROCEDURAL GUIDELINES FOR WTO COUNCILS AND COMMITTEES ADDRESSING 
TRADE CONCERNS (WT/G C/W/777/REV.5) – UPDATE FROM CO -SPONSORS  
10.1.   The Chairman  recalled that t he European Union had  requested the Secretariat to add th e item 
in the agenda of t hat day's meeting together with the proposal in WT/GC/W/777/Rev.5.  
10.2.   The representative of the European Uni on, on behalf of the co -sponsors of 
WT/GC/W/777/Rev.5 , provide d an update on Members'  work on the proposal for "Procedural 
Guidelines for WTO Councils and Committees Addressing Trade Concerns". When addressing the 
General Council immediately after taking office  as WTO Director -General  on 1 March, D r Ngozi  
Okonjo -Iweala had stressed the nee d to do things differently. While the spotlight was understandably 
on negotiations, the WTO 's monitoring and deliberative function was in need of change too – and 
that was maybe where Members  should start to do things differently. The co -sponsors of th e proposal 
share d a joint and continued interest in improving how Members address ed each other 's trade 
concerns in regular WTO bodies. In fact, the composition of co -sponsors – big and small traders, at 
different levels of development – told something about th e proposal itself. Almost all co -sponsors 
found themselves both at the raising and the responding side of conversations on trade concerns, 
and often with each other. Th at illustrate d Members'  genuine intention to make exchanges on trade 
concerns more effec tive and fruitful. Because th at should happen sooner rather than later, the co -
sponsors  had kept engaging with Members on the ideas in the proposal over the past months.  
10.3.   Today, the co -sponsors  did not intend to discuss possible revisions  but express ed their 
appreciation for the constructive comments received in their informal conversations with Members. 
Some ideas in the proposal, particularly those on meeting arrangements in Part 1, ha d already been 
taken up and put into practice. Examples include d an ind icative yearly schedule of meetings for the 
Goods Council and its subsidiary bodies or more collaborative and advance preparation of agendas 
in some WTO bodies. They also witness ed an increased interest for bilateral engagement on the 
margins of formal mee tings of some Committees where such engagement ha d so far not been 
regular practice. Th ose steps were welcome and encouraging. But there was also demand for some 
other improvements they propose d. Written questions, for example, were a very useful tool for 
structuring and focussing Members ' conversations on trade concerns. But there was currently no 
guidance on how to handle written questions, and more importantly, how to reply to them. WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 62 - 
 
  Guidelines , namely voluntary best practices, would facilitate Members ' engagement, for example on 
when replies to written questions c ould be expected. In th ose as well as other areas, co -sponsors 
were mindful of the constraints some Members were facing. The objectiv e was to improve Members ' 
discussions, not to create undue burdens.  
10.4.   Similarly, a user -friendly repository, or database, of relevant documents on a particular trade 
concern could significantly facilitate Members ' understanding of and engagement in a conversation 
on a trade concern.  Further, they all  agree d that informal engagement between the Member raising 
and the Member responding to a trade concern c ould contribute to resolving the issue, in addition 
to raising  it in official meetings. The proposal contain ed various suggestions on how to stimulate 
such informal engagement. During  the co -sponsors'  conversations with Members, they had 
understood that some consider ed that the proposed guidelines could, in certain c ases, lead to 
unintended consequences, or that the guidelines could  occasionally be burdensome for some 
Members. Assuming that they had a shared interest in making the exchanges on trade concerns 
more effective, the co -sponsors  called on Members to come fo rward with concrete suggestions. They 
were open to both alternative ideas and textual suggestions to mitigate the risk of unintended 
consequences. The co -sponsors confirm ed that they were committed to advancing the proposal 
towards a concrete outcome by MC 12 and looked forward to stepping up outreach and informal 
exchanges with Members in the coming months.  
10.5.   The representative of China  recalled  that the number of trade concerns raised in various WTO 
bodies ha d increased significantly in the past few years. How to effectively and timely address 
increasing number of concerns with constrained capacity , such as limited human resources , had 
become a commo n concern. The proposal could help address the above concern. Some 
recommendations in the proposal such as meeting arrangements ha d already been practiced in some 
meetings and delivered good results. The proposal  therefore  had merits in facilitating Member s 
tackling their trade concerns more effectively and efficiently by improving the procedures of regular 
bodies ' meetings. China st ood ready to continue their discussions on th e proposal.  
10.6.   The representative of Mexico  said that it was in the WTO regular bodi es that Members' 
respective private sectors paid greater attention to and showed greater interest in ensuring that 
their concerns were addressed expeditiously. A more efficient functioning would result in a lower 
saturation at a subsequent stage such as th e DSB. It was for that reason that Mexico was ready to 
continue the discussions and find alternatives to ensure that the Committees operated in the most 
efficient manner and fulfilled the functions that had been given to them – to monitor commitments 
and e ffectively address the trade concerns arising in the implementation of agreements.  
10.7.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  support ed efforts to move forward with th e 
proposal. Making sure trade concerns were effectively addressed in WTO Councils and Co mmittees  
was essential to overseeing the implementation of WTO Agreements. The organization need ed to be 
more systemically attuned and responsive to trade concerns raised by Members. The proposal w ould 
help shoulder  the WTO's deliberative and monitoring fu nctions , which was no less important than its 
negotiating and dispute settlement functions.  
10.8.   The representative of India support ed the idea of improving the meeting arrangements of 
WTO Bodies with a view to making them more efficient. India therefore support ed proposals for 
preparation of advanced indicative yearly schedule of meetings, circulation of all documents to be 
discussed at  a meeting at least fifteen days prior to the meeting and timely circulation of the minutes 
of meetings of various WTO bodies. It was in the interest of all Members to make full use of the WTO 
Councils and Committees to seek satisfactory outcomes of their trade concerns. In making any 
changes in procedures to be followed by various WTO bodies, Members should  ensure that such 
proposals d id not end up adding to or diminishing Members' rights and obligations under the 
concerned WTO Agreements. The appropriate forum for discussing procedural guidelines for trade 
concerns was the relevant Council or Committee dealing with  a specific trade concern , as per the 
scope of the relevant agreement. While India was open to discussing all possible suggestions aimed 
at impr oving existing processes, it would not like to take away the role of various WTO bodies in 
finalising such procedural guidelines.  
10.9.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  agree d with the European Union  and other co -sponsors 
that improving the WTO 's monitoring and deliberative function was critical to support the future 
reform of the WTO. Horizontal procedural guidelines c ould facilitate Members deal ing with daily 
works and respond ing more effectively to the booming but often recurring specific trade concerns. WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 63 - 
 
  The proposal was not only practically useful but also achievable and c ould serve as the first step 
toward WTO reform. Chinese Taipei  looked forward to working with Members to advance th e proposal 
and make it a concrete outcome for MC12.  
10.10.   The representative o f Bangladesh  associate d with the statement  of the LDC  Group  and 
thank ed the proponents for the proposed procedural guidelines with the fifth revision which aim ed 
to bring positive changes to the work of the Committees and Councils. Bangladesh  welcome d the 
constructive ideas in the draft proposal. There remained  room for improvement. Bangladesh had  
previously made some suggestions including changes in the existing format of the convening notic e 
and the necessity of uploading the meeting summary on the same day at the WTO website to help 
smaller delegations unable to attend all meetings update their information repository. Bangladesh 
had also pointed out the concerns on the proposed provision in  Paragraph 13 of the draft, regarding 
the participation of capital -based experts in person or through video conferencing , while not ing that 
internet facility was still a serious challenge in many countries. Without further repetition, 
Bangladesh  referred to its statement delivered in the October 2019 General Council  meeting and 
looked forward to engaging constructively with the proponents and other Members on th at issue.  
10.11.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs, took note of the update of the procedural 
guidelines proposed by the co -sponsors. The LDC Group was carefully examining the proposal and 
could  have further comments. The Group's  preliminary observation was for Members to keep in mind 
the constraints of LDCs an d the small size of  their delegations. The LDC Group reaffirm ed that, in 
its view, any proposal for new procedures and processes should  bear th at in mind.  
10.12.   The representative of  Mongolia  support ed the proposal. Since Members  were talking about  
procedural ma tters, he share d their observation s on the selection of officers to WTO bodies. He was 
personally involved in the selection process over the p ast three  years as the Coordinator of the Asian 
Group of Developing Countries. 2021 was an important year with MC1 2. Members should  find a way 
to quickly finali ze the selection  process to ensure the smooth operation of WTO bodies in  preparation 
for MC 12. That was not the first time such a case was taking place . There had been similar cases in 
the past. On every occasion, Members  referred to "unwritten rules " and regional balance. What c ould 
be found in the Guidelines for Appointment of Officers to WTO Bodies was the rotation principle as 
the general rule – Article 6.1 of the Guidelines  – which in practice was observed with respect to 
those in Group 1 and to a certain extent to  Group 2. For other bodies, Members  faced uncertainties 
and made reference to "unwritten rules ". He therefore suggest ed that the G eneral Council  take up 
the issue and refine the Guidelines to ensure a clearer functioning of the organization with regard s 
to the selection of officers to WTO bodies. Mongolia, as one of the co -sponsors of the waiver proposal 
at the TRIPS Council, commend ed the decision of the United States to support and engage in the 
negotiations for waiving IP protections for COVID -19 vaccines. It was truly an important moment.  
10.13.   The representative of South Africa  took note of the update by co -sponsors and recall ed its 
previous statements in th at regard. South Africa  remain ed concerned with the horizontal application 
of the proposal. Addressing specific trade concerns was provided for under certain agreements. 
Mainstreaming of STCs across all Committees and Councils w ould negatively impact developing 
countries who already ha d capacity constraints.  Members  already ha d the instruments needed to 
address trade concerns. Th e proposal was enlarging the mandates of regular bodies in ways South 
Africa  had concerns with. South Af rica did find helpful the suggestions under the section "meeting 
arrangements " relating to the documents  and minutes of  meetings.  
10.14.   The representative of the United Kingdom  support ed efforts to improve the functioning of 
the organization's regular Committees  and Councils. The United Kingdom  continue d to broadly 
support th ose proposals which provide d a good balance between creating quality minimum standards 
while offering scope for individual Committees to take tailored approaches for the way they operate d. 
It was true that the proposed procedural improvements would not alone solve the problems in the 
Councils and Committees. Members themselves need ed to continue to engage as constructively as 
possible in resolving the substantive concerns that were raised.  That mean t more listening and more 
working to find convergence as had been  discussed earlier th at week at the TNC.  
10.15.   The representative of the United States  was reviewing the proposal with an eye out for 
practical and modest steps that would rebuild norms f or Members to adequately respond to and 
address trade concerns raised by other Members. Th ose norms ha d eroded. The key culprit appear ed 
to be some Members ' lack of interest and political will to address such concerns. Fundamentally, the 
problem was substa ntive not procedural. But the United States did not  rule out that pragmatic WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 64 - 
 
  procedural norms could help. That said, Committees were diverse, and solutions that c ould be 
applied horizontally could  be few. In addition, it should be remembered that th ose trad e concerns 
were between Members . It was up to the Member raising the concern  – not the Secretariat or the 
Chair  – to determine how best to pursue the issue, when and where.  
10.16.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
11  STATEMENT BY COLOMBIA, COSTA RICA,  ECUADOR, PANAMA AND PARAGUAY ON 
TRADE RESTRICTIONS THAT BLOCK EQUAL ACCESS TO COVID -19 VACCINES  
11.1.   The Chairman  noted that t he item was included in the agenda by the delegations of Colombia, 
Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama and Paraguay.  
11.2.   The representative of Paraguay , on behalf of Panama , Ecuador , Costa Rica , Colombia  and 
Paraguay , recalled that in March, their delegations had made a new call to prevent export restrictions 
on vaccines. To date , no solution ha d been found to the world vacc ine trade situation . On the 
contrary, it ha d worsened, hampering equitable access to vaccines against COVID -19. The region of 
Latin America and the Caribbean was home to 8.4% of the global population but account ed for 30% 
of the world's total deaths from C OVID -19. The COVID -19 reproduction rate was higher than 1 in 
most of the region. Moreover, most Latin American and the Caribbean countries ha d already 
recorded cases of one or more of the three new variants of COVID -19.  
11.3.   The economic recession in Latin Ame rican and the Caribbean was the worst in 120 years, with 
a drop in growth of 7.7% in 2020. Exports had fallen  by about 13% and over 2.7 million enterprises , 
mostly small and medium sized enterprises , had closed their doors. While their countries h ad 
invested 4.3% of GDP in fiscal measures, Latin America and the Caribbean was to date the most 
heavily indebted region in the developing world – 79% of GDP  – with the largest external debt 
service in relation t o exports of goods and services , amounting to 57%. However, despite the fact 
that Latin America and the Caribbean ha d been the region most affected by COVID -19, it was 
worrying that the vaccinated population in the majority of countries in the region was less than 2.5% 
of the total population. Th at needed to be assessed in context . Over 1 billion doses administered 
worldwide was sufficient to vaccinate 6.7% of the global population. However, the hardest hit region 
was well below the average. As of 3 May 202 1, only 26,005,871 of citizens in Latin America and the 
Caribbean, less than 5%, ha d completed their vaccination. Of the doses received, only 5% - 2.8 
million – had been  delivered by the COVAX mechanism. The Director -General of the World Health 
Organizatio n had noted that "many of the wealthy countries that expressed support for COVAX were 
in parallel pre ordering the same vaccines on which COVAX was relying". Similarly, when it came to 
distributing the scarce doses, the current epidemiological characterist ics and the relative 
emergencies of countries that require d vaccines were not taken into account.  
11.4.   Several Members of their region had started to pre -order and purchase vaccines at the same 
time or even before some developed countries, despite their tight f iscal space, in order to address 
the looming health and economic crisis. The authors of this statement had all reacted in time and 
they all ha d contracts that had sought to cover all of their adult population and other vulnerable 
demographic groups. Unfort unately, all th ose actions ha d proved insufficient because of the lack of 
a collective response to the challenges and difficulties arising from the pandemic. In th at context, 
the functioning of global, predictable and rules -based trade was essential. Since their last " call" at 
the General Council meeting on 1 March, they noted with great concern:  
"That a significant number of Members are putting restrictions on exports of vaccines and 
their components.  
That measures restricting the trade i n vaccines are being upheld and increased, many of 
which are not visible, as they are embedded in contractual arrangements, crosscutting 
purchase orders or government orders, including verbal orders. In addition to hindering 
exports of these goods, these m easures are neither transparent nor have they been notified.  
That some countries have a significant excess of vaccines, that some call hoarding of 
vaccines. Members that have acquired more than twice the amount of vaccines needed to 
immunize the entire pop ulation and continue to announce new purchases, thereby 
undermining the ability of others to participate in a functional market.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 65 - 
 
  That there are instances of vaccines not being used, or even wasted, because of export 
restrictions. This in particular is simp ly unacceptable.  
That there are multiple instances where, in the face of the impossibility or difficulty of 
exporting such surpluses, the authorities are reacting by promoting and increasing vaccine 
tourism, which may be useful for some in particular, but does not contribute to equitable 
access and distribution at the global level.  
That, for the same reason, contract terms have been breached with respect to the agreed 
quantities and delivery dates of vaccinations and medical implements.  
That, lastly, there is a great deal of opacity around what is happening. Lack of transparency 
regarding contracts for the procurement of vaccines and medical products weakens the 
signals of a functional market."  
11.5.   The foregoing show ed clearly and conclusively that the var ious practices restricting trade and 
the market ha d worked against Members that depend ed on the import of vaccines. Th ose were not 
eminently public health issues, the province of forums such as the World Health Organization: they 
were trade restrictive pra ctices, a wide range of barriers to exports. Th ose obstacles, coupled with 
a very slow and insufficient increase in global vaccine production, create d market distortions through 
unilateral actions, resulting in a possible hike in prices. They also affect ed the predictability of their 
respective vaccination processes: between the restrictions and the overall low levels of production, 
and despite the fact that Members  had procurement contracts like those of any other Member from 
other regions, their countries  lacked the certainty required to plan their public health responses and 
by extension their socioeconomic responses.  
11.6.   The fact that the producer countries ha d gained access to vaccines first, not only erode d, in 
the medium and long term, the international t rade values that they all appreciate d and the 
confidence they had in the multilateral trading system, but also put everyone at risk and ha d been 
behind the worsening of the health crisis: the emergence of new variants, overwhelmed health 
systems and the ab sence of a global economic recovery plan. As a result, they were confronted not 
only with a global public health crisis, but also with concerns about the multilateral trading system 
and its principles to which they were all committed.  
11.7.   The representative of  Colombia  on behalf of Panama , Ecuador , Costa Rica , Paraguay  and 
Colombia , consider ed that th e WTO could and should play a proactive role in the recovery of 
international trade during this crisis and in the post -pandemic era. Th at should be done by, first of 
all, looking to remove as soon as possible, if not immediately, any trade barrier that prevent ed 
access to vaccines against COVID -19. In th at regard, they consider ed it essential that discussions 
on trade and health at the WTO should address:  
"The immediate or prompt removal of all export restrictions and obstacles related to the 
supply chain of COVID -19 vaccines and their components.  
 
A total commitment to prohibit any future export restrictions on COVID -19 vaccines and 
their components.  
 
The need for Members to urgently lift the export restrictions that prevent them from 
promptly disposing of vaccines th at are beginning to accumulate and far exceed the number 
required to vaccinate their populations, or worse still, that they already know will not be 
used because of their populations' preferences.  
 
The role of trade facilitation measures in timely access t o vaccines and their components, 
including customs and logistics procedures, as well as transparency with regard to, due 
notification of and information on those procedures.  
 
How to facilitate the movement of health personnel. There is not just a scarcity of goods. 
There are critical situations around the world because of the lack of skilled staff to participate 
in this huge health campaign. This is something we can review at the WTO, to support hot 
spots, as not all crises in territories take place at the same time.  
 WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 66 - 
 
  Possible harmonization of standards and transparency in procedures for approving and 
sanctioning vaccines, diagnostics and tests, in the framework of the Committee on Technical 
Barriers to Trade, in order to avoid the emergence of multiple inco mpatible standards that 
undermine vaccination and economic recovery efforts, as well as the quality of vaccines.  
 
A commitment to transparency. All measures affecting exports of vaccines and their 
components and other associated goods must be duly notified  and there should be 
appropriate areas in which to discuss them.  
 
An inclusive dialogue with multiple actors in order to have a comprehensive view of the 
problem. This will enable Members to move forward in constructive discussions with the 
pharmaceutical industry in order to promote more effective licensing schemes, avoid an 
uptick in prices and ensure equitable access to vaccines.  
 
The strengthening of multilateral cooperation and the promotion and effective use of 
innovative mechanisms such as C -TAP, the  Access to COVID -19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator and 
COVAX. " 
 
11.8.   Given  that there were  innumerable trade aspects, th ose ideas complement ed and reinforce d 
other discussions on health and trade in the WTO, such as the Trade and Health Initiative proposed 
by the Otta wa Group and other Members , or on the waiver proposed by India, South Africa and 
other Member s. They also complement ed and buil t on the Director -General's  efforts and the series 
of multi -stakeholder dialogues launched in April  2021 which were an important step towards seeking 
a better understanding of the challenges faced by different sectors in the search for effective 
responses , and ensuring an increase in the production and equitable di stribution of vaccines. But 
the discussion was even broader. It was essential that the countries importing vaccines and 
components participate d in those discussions in a manner that was representative of and consistent 
with the global dimension of the prob lem and the differentiated impact it ha d had in the different 
regions.  Colombia  was making  a new statement to the General Council with its Latin American 
partners since there was much more that c ould be done by the WTO. Health and trade were 
multidimension al issues that concern ed all. Global crises, such as the COVID -19 pandemic, require d 
them to abandon mercantilist interests and favour collective action. No one w ould be safe until 
everyone  was safe. 
11.9.   The representative of the Dominican Republic  associate d with th e statement on better vaccine 
distribution , since export restrictions and other practices identified in the statement were largely 
responsible for the severe global shortage of COVID -19 vaccines and other medical supplies, 
particularly in developing  and least developed countries . The COVID -19 pandemic was constantly  
evolving , and available data show ed that Latin America and the Caribbean ha d been one of the most 
affected regions, both in terms of the number of cases and the number of deaths. While the region  
had been  home to only 8.4% of the world's population, by December 2020 it had accounted for 
18.6% of all infections and 27.8% of COVID -19-related  deaths. Latin American and  Caribbean 
countries face d challenges on several fronts to control the pandemic. At the end of 2020, the 
Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean had estimated that the GDP of the 
economies of Latin Americ a and the Caribbean as a whole w ould fall by 7.7% and that the 
unemployment rate w ould increase by 2.6 percentage points. Th at severe economic recession 
implie d a worsening of living conditions, with substantial increases in unemployment, poverty and 
inequ alities. The hopes of  their populations for a possible recovery and return to normality were 
essentially based on vaccination , against th at great evil afflicting the whole of humanity. The 
involvement of all global players, and particularly the WTO, was therefore necessary to remove all 
trade barriers that hinder ed the distribution of th at common good, the COVID -19 vaccine, in an 
equitable manner.  It was time to put solidarity above trade and nationalist interests to save 
thousands of endangered lives and v ulnerable populations around the world, particularly in Latin 
America and the Caribbean, by means of humane, fair, transparent and equitable trade.  
11.10.   The representative of Ecuador  associated with  the joint statement which reflect ed the 
situation faced by the Latin America and the Caribbean  region , and the concerns of Colombia, Costa 
Rica, Panama, Paraguay and  Ecuador on the trade barriers that were impeding equitable access to 
COVID -19 vaccines. The statement s ought  to contribute to the discussions on trade and health that 
were currently taking place at the WTO, by focusing their attention on a trade issue that was key to 
the exercise of the right to health, the provision of care for the millions of pe ople affected by the 
pandemic, and the return to social and economic normality for countries. The crisis ha d undoubtedly WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 67 - 
 
  had an impact on development levels and poverty reduction in the context of the 2030 Agenda and 
the Sustainable Development Goals. Th at was the case for Latin America and the Caribbean which 
was experiencing the worst economic recession in 120 years, as indicated in the communication. 
That was a global crisis with consequences for all. It was therefore necessary to design a glo bal, 
effective and urgent strategy.  
11.11.   As regards trade issues, it was clear that th e organization ha d a key role to play. Ecuador  
was concerned that the impact of COVID -19 on developing and least  developed countries had been  
more severe, and that the ir response had been  hampered not only by limited resources to purchase 
vaccines and medical inputs, but also by the threat of trade barriers imposed by Members and the 
unjustified breach of contracts by private firms. Ecuador  had been  pleased that some countries  had 
attained national vaccination goals and ha d agreed to procure millions of vaccine doses for their 
populations. However, at the same time, Ecuador  had been  discouraged by the fact that several 
dozen nations, despite seeking vaccines on the market or pa rticipating in mechanisms such as the 
COVAX Facility, ha d not yet managed to vaccinate even the most vulnerable groups of their 
populations or the workers on the frontline of the fight against the pandemic. Global crises require d 
joint action by all stakeh olders in the international community, governments and international 
agencies, but also by pharmaceutical firms, financial institutions and academic research centres.  
11.12.   In the spirit of supporting and developing th at approach, Ecuador congratulate d and than ked 
Dr. Ngozi  for her initiative to initiate a dialogue with multiple stakeholders. Ecuador  was confident 
that th e dialogue w ould continue to be comprehensive and inclusive so that the needs of all, 
especially those dependent on vaccine imports, c ould be met. Ecuador consider ed that an operational 
health and trade framework w ould contribute to the fight against th at and future health crises. It 
was a matter of urgency to eliminate any trade barriers preventing equitable access to COVID -19 
vaccines and their  components , as well as  medical equipment and services  essential for the current 
health response. Ecuador  was confident that they would still be able to provide an effective response 
to the challenges th ey were facing . The statement therefore promote d the spirit of international 
cooperation and solidarity, to ensure that access to vaccines was universal and guaranteed through 
the collecti ve work of States , request ed immediate or prompt elimination of all export restrictions 
and barriers related to the COVID -19 vaccine supply chain and identifie d areas in which trade policy 
solutions were required to contribute to  enable  the sustained globa l immunization process.  
11.13.   The representative of Panama  said that t he pandemic ha d led Members to take dramatic 
measures to contain the spread of the virus that ha d affected the economies and development of all 
countries.  Certain vulnerabilities exist ed and i t had shed light on challenges that no body had 
foreseen. A large number of Members ha d expressed their solidarity in response to the COVID -19 
pandemic. Those statements ha d mentioned the principle according to which any trade -related 
measure that was deeme d appropriate in response to the crisis should be transparent, proportionate, 
temporary, clearly related to dealing with the pandemic and consistent with WTO commitments. In 
light of those statements, Panama  was surprised and concerned to see systematic ac tions being 
taken over the past few weeks that ha d been nationalistic in nature. Th ose were done by Members 
in relation to vaccine purchasing and distribution. That went against what ha d been said in the past 
and the WTO's foundation . Panama  was particularly concerned  with the implementation of measures 
that restrict ed vaccine exports.  Members should  work together globally to fight  COVID -19.  
11.14.   Along with Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador and Paraguay, and now the Dominican Republic, 
Panama had asked f or that item to be included on the agenda so they could call upon all Members 
to abstain from those kinds of behaviours. They had wanted  to raise some ideas that could feed into 
other discussions o n trade and health and the role that the WTO could  play in economic recovery 
once the COVID -19 pandemic was over. COVID -19 d id not respect borders nor levels of 
development. Th at was a global problem. The global solution c ould only be one that Members  
achieve d together. Panama  commended  Dr Ngozi for her efforts to  identify places where vaccine 
production capacity could  exist particularly in developing countries and to facilitate as broad an 
approach to production as possible , to reduce the divide in access to vaccines. Her efforts however 
would only be successful i f all Members worked in a spirit of solidarity to avoid interruptions and 
breakages in global supply chains. If they failed to do that, they ran the risk of suffering an even 
slower economic and social recovery for all. The solution to the pandemic involve d fair distribution 
of essential goods, medicines and vaccines that w ould help fight COVID -19, and global cooperation.  
11.15.   The representative of Australia  noted that, w ith the COVID -19 pandemic surging in many 
parts of the world, Australia recogni zed the immen se loss and severe public health challenge facing WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 68 - 
 
  many Members. It was in the interests of all Members to ensure the timely, equitable and global 
immuni zation against COVID -19 which w ould form one important component of their collective 
efforts to bring th e pandemic under control. It ha d become evident over the course of the COVID -
19 pandemic that export restrictions utili zed by some Members c ould lead to negative impacts on 
global markets, food security and health. It was paramount that Members avoid ed making th e health 
crisis worse, through unnecessary export restrictions and other trade barriers. COVID -19 was a 
global health crisis that need ed a global solution and international cooperation was essential to keep 
trade flowing.  Australia 's longstanding pos ition was that COVID -19 vaccines should not be subject 
to restrictive trade measures, and that there was a global and moral responsibility on all countries 
to share COVID -19 vaccines far and wide. While Australia unders tood the political and humane 
impulse  that c ould lead to the imposition of trade restrictive measures, such measures and the 
retaliation that they could  trigger were ultimately likely to lead to fewer total vaccines being 
produced, and so  it would  ultimately be counter -productive.  
11.16.   At the 14 April vaccine equity event hosted by D r Ngozi , Australia had  heard from a wide 
variety of stakeholders involved in the global vaccine effort that export restrictions and other trade 
barriers were making th e health crisis worse. Australia remain ed concerned on the imposition by 
some Members of trade barriers, including both formal and informal export restrictions, on COVID -
19 vaccines and their inputs.  Australia urge d all Members maintaining unnecessary trade  barriers 
on COVID -19 vaccines to consider removing those measure s as soon as possible  and called on all  
Members to work together to find ways to keep supply chains open to ensure the maximum possible 
production of vaccines. As had been  discussed in agenda  item nine, the Trade and Health Initiative 
offered a practical solution to address COVID -19 and any future health crises, and aim ed to deliver 
short-term action on trade in health products and ha d the potential to establish longer term 
disciplines and tra de liberali zation in th at sector with the broader WTO Membership. Australia  invite d 
all Members to engage in the Trade and Health Initiative and  to take immediate steps to address 
the crisis, minimising disruptions to supply chains, sharing best practices on trade facilitation, 
promoting transparency and fostering greater collaboration with international organi zations. 
11.17.   The representative of Argentina  said that the joint statement of Paraguay, Colombia and 
other Members  present ed the stark reality, with irre futable data, of the health, economic and social 
situation in Latin America as a whole, caused by a pandemic that ha d dramatically exposed the 
vulnerabilities and inequities of social, political, economic and health systems throughout the world. 
Latin Amer ica was facing one of the most critical periods of the pandemic, with a second wave which 
was hitting their countries very hard, and which was posing unprecedented challenges that require d 
innovative solutions based on coordinated, transparent and cooperat ive global action. Argentina 
echoe d the concerns expressed by th ose delegations regarding the deep inequality which ha d 
characterized the administration and distribution of vaccines at the global level, and which ha d 
severely affected Latin America and the Caribbean . That inequality d id not only challenge them from 
a moral point of view, but also pose d the health risk of t he virus becoming endemic and creating 
reservoirs with the ability to mutate into more aggressive and contagious variants.  
11.18.   For th at reason, Argentina  had reaffirmed in various fora that it consider ed COVID -19 
vaccines as global public goods that all person s should be able to access equitably, and ha d 
supported global initiatives such as the ACT Accelerator, the Solidarity Call to Action, C -TAP and the 
COVAX Facility, as it was  convinced that they constitute d concrete commitments with a fair and 
equitable di stribution of vaccines.  Those initiatives ha d however  been affected by bilateral 
negotiations, a lack of unified bargaining power with regard to procurement processes, intellectual 
property rights, and the lack of effective technological transfer, which had not ma de it possible to 
increase the production capacity for medicines , but had instead concentrated production in a few 
countries and had critically delayed the distribution of vaccines across the world. The meeting 
convened by Dr. Ngozi  on 14 April had revealed that there was a significant overlap between the 
role of international trade and that of the WTO in terms of production, distribution and access to 
vaccines, medicines and other health technologies for the containment of COVID -19. However, 
Member s had not yet been able achieve the stated common objective of providing timely and safe 
access to quality, safe, effective and affordable vaccines.  
11.19.   The actions that Members  should  promote were unavoidable from an economic perspective, 
as the recovery that  they were beginning to observe w ould continue to be asymmetric as long as 
access to vaccination remain ed concentrated in only a few countries. In the short term, Members'  
biggest challenge was to achieve immunity for at risk populations in all countries a s soon as possible, 
without differentiation. They could not rest easy in the knowledge that there were countries where WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 69 - 
 
  immunity w ould be achieved by mid -2021, while others would  not attain immunity until the end of 
2022 or even 2023. Given the magnitude of the current health crisis, all initiatives aimed at ensuring 
fair access, promoting the effective transfer of technology, increasing local production capacities and 
the timely distribution of vaccines at the global level, were welcome and deserve d immediate and 
additional consideration. Members  could not afford to delay  their response  any longer. The time to 
act was now. Members  should  be able to take concrete, consensual and co ordinated action that 
placed the WTO at the centre of the economic and health recovery.  
11.20.   The representative of Peru express ed its concern on the situation of many Latin American  
countries , and the developing world generally , given the lack of supply of vacc ines exacerbated by 
the current restrictions put in place. The COVAX Facility, a multilateral response to address such 
issue, ha d been affected by th at. Peru underscore d the importance of ensuring a smooth, rules based 
international trading system , that sh ould work effectively without barriers to the benefit of all 
Members. The role of international trade was important in helping to combat the pandemic and its 
health and economic consequences. The communication from th ose delegations merit ed 
consideration. They could be particularly useful in helping their discussions on what the WTO c ould 
and should do to contribute to efforts to combat COVID -19. Peru also thank ed Dr. Ngozi for her 
tireless efforts to identify possibilities to extend production and distribu tion of vaccines around the 
world. Peru also thank ed the positive contribution made by the Trade and Health Initiative which 
had led to urgent and important discussions on th e matter.  
11.21.   The representative of Jamaica , on behalf of the ACP  Group , sympathi zed with the concerns 
raised. There was no doubt that the COVID -19 pandemic was the most significant crisis of their 
lifetime. The unprecedented negative impact of the crisis on their health care systems, the health 
and welfare of their populations , and the fall out in their economies require d international 
cooperation, sympathy for the situation of Members with less financial capacity, and importantly, 
global efforts to bring about affordable access to vaccines, therapeutics and other items necessa ry 
to prevent, treat and contain the virus. Millions of lives ha d been lost and shortages of drugs to treat 
the virus ha d put the lives of their people, health care workers and other essential workers at risk.  
11.22.   Vaccination  was the most durable solution. As  developing countries and LDCs, they should  
have equitable access to vaccines and other items required to prevent, treat and contain  COVID -19. 
There was absolutely no place for vaccine nationalism in th e crisis. Neither was there a place for 
vaccine politi cs. No Member was spared the impact of the virus until all Members were able to contain 
its spread. The ACP Group  therefore express ed deep concerns over the implementation of measures 
by some Members that prohibit ed or restrict ed export of vaccines, therapeutics and other items 
necessary to prevent, treat and contain the virus. The ACP  Group called on Members to reverse 
those measures as they would diminish the ability of developing countries and LDCs to contain the 
virus, thereby  prolonging the pandemic.  
11.23.   The representative of Uruguay  noted that, i n the long history of the GATT since 1947 and 
the WTO since 1995, Members  had learned over and over again that protectionism had only led to 
less trade, less development and more poverty for their people. There ha d not been a single 
economic or trade crisis that ha d been resolved by isolation and trade disruptive measures in the 
context of international trade in goods and services. No health crisis c ould be resolved through th ose 
mechanism s either. Uruguay  therefore fully agree d with the concerns raised by the co -sponsors of 
the declaration. Restrictive or protectionist measures relating to vaccines constitute d a serious 
barrier to the success of the international campaign to combat the pan demic which was in the general 
interest of the international community. Uruguay  welcome d the efforts made by the Director -General 
to ensure better access to vaccines and invite d Members to ensure that they d id not impose export 
restrictions or measures tha t disrupt ed vaccine and medicine supply chains or indeed any technical 
or administrative measure , that could  prevent other Members from getting access to tools to enable 
them to combat COVID -19 effectively.  
11.24.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDC Group , share d the concern expressed by 
Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Panama and Paraguay regarding export restrictions on medical 
products, including vaccines. In its communication of 4 May 2020 on the LDCs' emergency access 
to essential medical and f ood products to combat the COVID -19 pandemic in document WT/GC/211, 
the LDC Group ha d already expressed its concern about th ose measures and the impact that they 
could  have on LDCs dependent on imports to combat the COVID -19 pandemic. For th ose reasons, 
the Group call ed on the European Union to exercise the utmost restraint in the adoption and 
implementation of such measures.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 70 - 
 
  11.25.   The representative of South Africa  associate d with the statement of the ACP  Group . COVID -
19 was a global pandemic that kn ew no bounda ries. Members could  only defeat the pandemic 
through multilateral cooperation as no one was safe until everyone was safe. Vaccine nationalism 
was therefore incredibly short -sighted, whereas the more sustainable solution was that sharing of 
technologies, kn ow-how and data that w ould enable production of vaccines across the world and 
ensure timely, affordable and equitable access to vaccines and therapeutics for all. Over one billion 
doses ha d been administered so far, 87% of th ose ha d gone to developed count ries. South Africa 
had heard from the D irector -General  of the WHO on 14 April that 1 in 4 people in developed countries 
had got a jab but 1 in 500 in poor countries ha d received the shot. Only 0.2% of vaccines dispensed 
so far were in low -income countries. Th at demonstrate d the inequity in vaccine access.  
11.26.   The TRIPS Waiver was the most viable policy instrument that w ould halt the rapid 
transmission of COVID -19, reduce the  risks of variants and promote economic recovery. An effective 
response to the pandemic was only achievable when Members  address ed the supply -side constraints 
and remove d IP barriers and boost ed local production of vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics. T hat 
was the only way to ensure  that everyone, everywhere c ould access the health technologies they 
needed for COVID -19 detection, prevention, treatment and not through hoarding of vaccines. South 
Africa encourage d the countries that were concerned with lac k of equity in vaccine access to join the 
TRIPS Waiver. An effective way to deal with vaccine nationalism was to ramp up production. Without 
guarantees and coordination on boosting supply, individual governments w ould revert to self -
defeating vaccine natio nalism and impose export restrictions on vaccines.  
11.27.   The representative of the European Union  was sensitive to the dire situation that Latin 
American countries and others in other parts of the world were facing in combating the pandemic. 
The European Union  hoped that Members ha d, since the last meeting , seen the practical confirmation 
of its recent statements in that the E uropean Union  continue d to be one of the world 's largest 
exporters of vaccines both in absolute terms and relative to its overall production. Th at include d 
significant deliveries to the C OVAX  facility. The European Union  had extended its authori zation 
measure until the end of June, and it ha d been adju sted to take into account whether a destination 
country was equally open to sending vaccines to the E uropean Union  and to take account of the 
epidemiological situation in that country. Th at had been  done in the spirit of ensuring fairness and 
equity in vac cine distribution. The mechanism ha d been in operation already for three months. Until 
now, during the lifetime of the mechanism, the European Union had exported more than 170 million 
doses of vaccines to the world. However, in total, since the introductio n of the vaccines to the market 
in December, and counting also exports exempted from the mechanism, the European Union  had 
exported more than 210 million doses. Th at mean t that the E uropean Union wa s exporting half of 
its production. No other OECD member a nd vaccine producer ha d done that.  
11.28.   The European Union  assure d Members  that vulnerable, low and middle -income countries 
continue d to be exempted from the scope of the mechanism, as were any exports to the COVAX 
facility. In the meantime, like others,  the Eu ropean Union  continue d to struggle with a speedy 
delivery of vaccines to its own citizens. All Members  were under enormous pressure to deliver. A 
question ar ose on  how to increase access to vaccines for those countries that were not vaccine 
producers and t hat d id not have sufficient resources to set up production on their own. The WTO 
event on equity of vaccine distribution of 14 April ha d showed Members  very clearly that that the 
equitable access require d very close cooperation between governments, regulat ors, financial 
institutions,  and companies themselves to scale up production. To do that , a scale -up should  take 
place across the whole value chain. There was a need to have more information about markets and 
government measures.  
11.29.   The E uropean Union  had taken a good note of Dr Ngozi 's call to reduce the number of export 
restrictions. Members  should however distinguish measures which operate d as an effective ban on 
exports from measures which were intended to ensure some degree of fairness in distribution  of 
scarce goods and which d id not restrict exports more than absolutely necessary. As the European 
Union  had reiterated on numerous occasions in the past, its measure was not an exports ban. The 
European Union  had also already explained that it had prompt ly and diligently reported all versions 
of the mechanism to the WTO 's monitoring of trade measures related to C OVID -19 and had notified 
them under relevant requirements, such as the CTG Decision on Notification Procedures for 
Quantitative Restrictions. The  European Union remained  committed to ensuring the greatest degree 
of transparency and call ed on other Members to do the same with respect to any measure that could  
have a trade -restricting effect. The European Union  appreciate d Dr. Ngozi's efforts in that respect WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 71 - 
 
  and look ed forward to working with her on all the different strands of work relating to their joint 
fight against th e pandemic.  
11.30.   The representative of the United Kingdom  said that it wa s a very interesting debate and, as 
many ha d said, nobody w ould be safe until everybody  was safe. As Australia  had said, th at wa s a 
global crisis and it needed a global solution. Free and fair trade ha d never been more important than 
in the fight against C OVID -19. Open supply chains help ed ensure pe ople g ot the critical goods they 
needed, such as vaccines. The United Kingdom was proud to be fully engaged in the global response 
to the pandemic whether it was through the COVID -19 Tools (ACT) Accelerator or COVAX which, 
together, help ed to ensure develo ping countries c ould access COVID -19 vaccines. Together, 
Members  could and should  meet the global demand by joining forces to ramp up their vaccine 
production. That was why barriers to trade in vaccines were in nobody 's interest. The U nited Kingdom  
encoura ged Members to review and roll -back those measures still in place as soon as possible. 
Members  should also step up and work collectively towards removing trade restrictive measures on 
medical goods, including COVID -19 vaccines.  
11.31.   As well as continuing coope ration with fellow governments on measures to tackle the 
pandemic like those referred to by the United Kingdom's statement concerning  the Trade and Health 
Initiative , the United Kingdom  also call ed upon industry to engage at the WTO  as Dr Ngozi had been 
doing in her meetings. Governments c ould not do th at on their own. The United Kingdom remain ed 
interested in hearing their reflections on what c ould be done to help overcome th ose bottlenecks so 
that together they could get supply lines moving. Like others, the United Kingdom had also noted 
the announcement made by the USTR on the TRIPS Waiver. The United Kingdom  was committed to 
continuing its discussions with both the U nited States  and other Members to find the swiftest and 
most effective way to fac ilitate the increased production and supply of COVID -19 vaccines. The 
United Kingdom  recogni zed the importance of vaccines to building back better and stronger. That 
was why the United Kingdom  looked forward to continuing to work closely with all Members t o keep 
their trade in vaccines flowing.  
11.32.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  share d the concerns raised by Colombia and 
others that trade restrictive measures could  disrupt supply chains and the global distribution of 
COVID -19 vaccines and impact cl ear access to essential medicines. Members  were in the midst of 
searching for a solution to how best to ramp up vaccine production. However, scaling up vaccine 
production c ould only be truly meaningful when it was accessible to everyone everywhere. As had 
been made clear during the webinar hosted by Dr Ngozi on 14 April, export restrictive measures 
held one of the biggest challenges in the fight against the pandemic. Members should  refrain from 
vaccine protectionism. If anything, Members should  help strengt hen multilateral efforts to contribute 
to equitable access to COVID -19 vaccines. Korea w ould continue to work in concert with other 
Members to ensure that essential medical supplies were accessible to all.  
11.33.   The representative of Canada  had intervened at the recent meetings of the Council for Trade 
in Goods and the Committee on Market Access in relation to the agenda items on export restriction. 
In those statements, Canada had  provided some thoughts on how it underst ood GATT Article XI.2(a) 
and how it had come into existence. Canada  had also spoke n about how little th at provision had 
been used by Members prior to 2020. Canada  wonder ed if recourse to Article XI.2(a)  could  really 
not be appropriate in the midst of global efforts to address a gl obal crisis.  Canada therefore 
elaborate d further th at discussion by reflecting a little more on the past, mak ing some observations 
on the present and consider ing what Members  could do to better support the future. Since the GATT, 
there ha d been at least fo ur examinations by Members of the Article XI provisions and the use of 
the measures disciplined by them. An early effort in 1950 had resulted in an agreement on standard 
practices for the administration of import and export restrictions and exchange contro ls. While non -
binding, the intent had been  to improve the administrative practices of Members and reduce 
unpredictability in the implementation of trade controls. Further efforts in the 1950s had seen  some 
improvements in the provisions around import contr ols in relation to balance of payments provisions. 
Work in the 1970s and the 1980s had not however  resulted  in improvements to the rules.  
11.34.   From the information exchanged during th ose past discussions, it appear ed clear to Canada 
that when export restrictio ns had been  imposed, it had been  to address local conditions namely in 
relation to supplies of natural resources or to promote domestic value -added activities. However, 
while pandemics ha d devastating impacts on many economies and local communities, they were by 
definition global problem s driven first and foremost by health concerns. From the experiences over 
the past year, there were clearly lessons to be learned on how Members ha d reacted to the challenge WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 72 - 
 
  of the pandemic. For example, Members ha d shared in the Trade Facilitation Committ ee how early 
implementation of the agreement and innovative solutions at the border ha d helped them to 
positively facilitate trade including for medical supplies during the pandemic.  Members had  also 
begun to hear more about the negative effects of measure s taken to restrict trade in medical 
supplies. In March 2021, the discussion document entitled "Landscape of Current COVID -19 Supply 
Chain Manufacturing Capacity: Potential Challenges, Initial Responses and Possible Solution Space" 
highlight ed how export r estrictions ha d reduced the global supply of certain inputs to vaccine 
production. Similar findings in respect of medical supplies had been  reported to WHO Member States 
at the recent briefing on an evaluation of the COVID Supply Chain System. This COVID S upply Chain 
System was an effort by UN Agencies, public health partners, vendors and NGOs to improve access 
to essential medical supplies to address COVID -19 through coordinated and efficient pandemic 
supply chains. During that recent briefing session, the  presentation by the WHO Chief of Operations 
Logistics had noted that in early 2020, trade restrictions had been  a major obstacle to moving critical 
supplies to where they had been  needed the most. He had also observed that export bans had 
further restrict ed global access to supplies.  
11.35.   In response to the proliferation of new export restrictions at the outset of the pandemic, G20 
Leaders had affirmed that "emergency measures designed to tackle COVID -19, if deemed necessary, 
must be targeted, proportionate, transparent and temporary and that they do not create 
unnecessary barriers to trade or disruption to global supply chains and are consisten t with WTO 
rules." But what if "consistent with WTO rules" was not good enough? What if the current rules 
actually d id not support multilateral efforts to maintain the free movement of medical supplies and 
their inputs? When faced with a similar global hea lth crisis, Canada asked whether  Members would 
choose only as a last resort to impose restrictions on exports of essential medical goods . What if 
instead the multilateral trading system could be improved to provide guidance to Members in th at 
regard – that was, to first seek out how to support multilateral efforts in harnessing all available 
global resources and maximi sing the production and distribution of the medical goods needed to 
face the next global health emergency  – essentially, to not let the multi lateral trading system get in 
the way of future versions of the COVID -19 supply chain system ? 
11.36.   One of the recommendations from the system's aforementioned review was for the WHO to 
develop a playbook to guide the agency's response in the next crisis. Member s should take stock of 
the lessons learned throughout th e pandemic in relation to the use of GATT Article XI.2(a) on trade 
in medical supplies. New principles on the use of export restrictions for medical supplies could help  
guide the decisions Members  made in the next health crisis especially in support of any WHO 
playbook. The Trade and Health Initiative provide d a framework for Members  to proceed. In 
particular, minimi sing or avoiding the use of export restrictions was more than a sufficient step , it 
was an essential step to achieving Members'  collective objective.  As ha d been heard often, the supply 
chains for medical products including vaccines were diverse and their inputs were produced and 
sourced around the world. Avoiding the imposition of export  restrictions on th ose inputs and the 
finished products was a key building block to ensure the ability of manufacturers to ramp up their 
production a nd the subsequent distribution of th ose products. Canada w ould continue considering 
how Members c ould impro ve the use of Article XI.2(a) in support of collective efforts to address 
future health crisis and look ed forward to working with Members on th at important issue.  
11.37.   The representative of Saint Lucia , on behalf of CARICOM , associate d with the statement of 
the ACP Group . CARICOM consider ed the matter of access to vaccines to be a moral one and 
Members had an interest in ensuring that all countries ha d equitable access to COVID -19 vaccines 
in a timely manner. As small island developing States, the COVID -19 pande mic ha d stretched their 
public health and fiscal capacity to their very limit. CARICOM was therefore very concerned about 
growing vaccine nationalism and trade restrictions on vaccines. While CARICOM  unders tood that 
certain supply chain and manufacturing i ssues were diminishing access to vaccines, th ose problems 
were only compounded by vaccine nationalism and trade restrictions. The impact of th at reality was 
severe.  Prospects for a safe and sustainable economic recovery in the short to medium term were 
unlikely to materialize if the supply gap and inequitable access to vaccines continue d to plague 
Members . CARICOM  urged all Members to exercise due restraint with respect to the trade restrictions 
being imposed on the vaccines including vital inputs needed for the manufacturing process. 
CARICOM  was also concerned that many of the restrictions currently in place lack ed transparency. 
Transparency was one of the fundamental and enduring principles of the WTO. Members  should  also 
seek to gain a better understanding of how WTO rules c ould be deployed to remove friction in the 
supply of vaccines. It was therefore incumbent on them to explore how the rules c ould accommodate 
an increase in the speed of supply. CARICOM  stood ready to work with all Members to ensure that WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 73 - 
 
  all countries , particularly the most vulnerable , had equitable access to vaccines. History w ould judge 
them harshly  if they failed in that endeavour.  
11.38.   The representative of Sri Lanka  said that, a s many had stated t hat day, the world could only 
defeat the pandemic through multilateral cooperation as no one was safe until everyone was safe. 
Vaccine nationalism was seen as  incredibly short -sighted. The more sustainable solution would be 
the sharing of technologies, know -how and data that would enable production of vaccines across the 
world and ensure timely, affordable and equitable access to vaccines and therapeutics for a ll. In th at 
regard, the proposed TRIPS Waiver provide d that and was the most viable policy instrument that 
would halt the rapid transmission of COVID -19, reduce the risks of variants and promote economic 
recovery. An effective response to the pandemic was only achievable when everyone everywhere 
could access the health technologies,  they need ed for COVID -19 detection, prevention, treatment 
and not through hoarding of vaccines. Speaking of Sri Lanka's  situation, which was currently 
experiencing  the devastating effects of the third wave, it was facing a shortage of 600,000 doses of 
the Oxford -AstraZeneca COVID -19 vaccine. The shortage was not its government's  fault. That  
situation had arisen due to the inability of the manufacturers to supply the required quantities. Under 
the first round, 925,242 persons had been  vaccinated and , at present, there was a shortage of 
600,000 doses, as the country had not gotten the vaccines ordered from India, which was currently  
battling its own COVID -19 resurgence. Sri Lanka  had also approached the COV AX Secretariat with 
an urgent request to supply  it with that quantity under the assured amount that would enabl e it to 
vaccinate  those who ha d already received their first jab of the Oxford -AstraZeneca COVID -19 
vaccine. So far, no affirmative response ha d been received due to the current acute shortage  as a 
result of th e situation in India.  
11.39.   The Government of Sri Lanka was  working with other suppliers to import Russia 's Sputnik V 
and Pfizer COVID -19 vaccines  – though the former  was yet to be approved by the WHO while the 
latter  was exorbitantly expensive. Tests were being carried out in Sri Lanka to determine whether 
the first dose could be given from one vaccine and the second dose with another, and  see if  it would 
be possible to give a "cocktail" in the future based on the result s of the tests. While making such 
efforts, Sri Lanka  appeal ed to the international community, the patent holders and countries who 
were manufacturing and had manufacturing capacity to come forward and help countries such as Sri 
Lanka  that did not  have capacity to manufacture the vaccines by removing all those obstacles 
hindering the access to those most needed vaccines. Sri Lanka thanked  the current  government of 
the United States  for demonstrat ing its  solidarity and leadership at a time when it had mostly  been 
sought when it had announced that it would be joining the discussions with the aim of finding a 
lasting solution to the scarcity of vaccines around the world . Sri Lanka als o thanked those  who had 
announced th eir willing ness to join the negotiations on  the waiver proposal.  
11.40.   The representative of India said that e xport restrictions were legitimate policy tool s available 
to Members. They ha d a dual use and were useful for certain circumstances. For instance, during 
the pandemic , where Members  were not working under perfect market conditions, India ha d used 
that tool for ensuring equitable distribution of critical medicines, vaccines, diagnostic kits, ventilators 
and PPEs to more than 150 countries based on mutually assessed needs. In the absence of whic h, 
the entire supply could  have been cornered by a few privileged with deep pockets. India support ed 
the need for ensuring smooth and open supply chains of raw materials and inputs required to 
manufactur e vaccines, medicines and therapeutics related to COV ID-19. Members'  efforts should 
also not stop at making vaccines available. They  should sincerely work together to provide timely 
and equitable access  to affordab le medicines and vaccines . Export restrictions should remain as a 
policy tool given their dual use nature . Their impact depend ed on how Members chose to use them.  
11.41.   The representative of Mexico  noted that controlling the pandemic was the most important 
challenge that all Members faced. COVID -19 ha d wreaked havoc around the world, with thousands 
of sad  losses of human life and very difficult economic conditions to be addressed in the short, 
medium and long term. As had already been pointed out by Paraguay and Colombia, the Latin 
American and Caribbean  region ha d been particularly affected. So far, Mexic o had confirmed 2.4 
million cases of infection and 217,000 total deaths from COVID -19. Despite the fact that Mexico had  
had access to vaccines, uncertainty remain ed about the speed at which th ose would reach Mexico 
and be administered extensively to its population. Mexico therefore express ed its  systemic concern 
about the decision of some Members to establish export restrictions on COVID -19 vaccines and to 
consider other measures with a similar objective – which other Members had already imposed . 
Mexico support ed the call for all  Members to exercise restraint in the imposition of measures that 
affect ed the export of vaccines and other essential medical products. If Members  were to overcome WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 74 - 
 
  the crisis, it was vital that  they all support ed the smooth  functioning of global supply chains and 
production and avoid ed measures that could have negative and restrictive effects on trade flows.  
11.42.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  said that t he inequality of vaccine distribution was of 
serious concern for the w hole international community, not merely the concern of the Latin American 
and Caribbean countries. As the coronavirus and the more dangerous variants continue d to spread, 
the problems on insufficient  global  production and supplies of vaccine should  be con stantly examined 
and the distribution failure should  be corrected. Chinese Taipei thanked some Members , such as the 
European Union , India  and the United Kingdom, among others,  for their efforts to increase their 
vaccine production and exportation.  Chinese Taipei  still call ed on all Members to demonstrate 
solidarity to ensure an absolutely undisruptive movement of vaccines and medicines at th at critical 
moment and to lift all trade restrictive measures on vaccines to address the unprecedented public 
health c risis. Chinese Taipei  also thank ed Canada for suggesting a systemic way of addressing th at 
issue based on Article XI:2(a) of the GATT 1994 , that deserve d further discussion. Chinese  Taipei 
looked forward to any systemic solution on th at issue.  
11.43.   The representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia  noted that t he pandemic ha d affected 
all developing countries around the world. Latin America and the Caribbean ha d been even more 
affected than other regions. Bolivia  thank ed the co -sponsors for the ir call and for having raised 
awareness of what was going on in their region and the problems being experienced with fair access 
to vaccines. Bolivia  had, on a number occasions, stressed that vaccines for COVID -19 should be 
seen as a global common good. Members should  ensure that it c ould be effectively distributed among 
their people through cooperation. All the proposals that aim ed to accelerate th e process and ensure 
that all Members ha d fair access to medicines and vaccines should be considered and discu ssed by 
the WTO in good faith and with the necessary openness on the part of all Members , to ensure that 
they could achieve their common goal.  
11.44.   The representative of Costa Rica , on behalf of Panama , Ecuador , Paraguay , Colombia  and 
Costa Rica , thanked all the delegations for their valuable comments and ideas. Without prejudice to 
the discussions on vaccine production, which had taken  place the previous day, they were  glad to 
see that there was also a lot of interest in discussing issues related to the vaccine trade. For those 
countries that were predominantly importers of vaccines, it was essential that their position be heard 
and that permanent steps  were taken to restrict, now and in the future, measures that hamper ed 
equitable access to vaccines.  
11.45.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
12  INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE UNCTAD/WTO – REPORT OF THE JOINT ADVISORY 
GROUP ON ITS 54TH SESSION (ITC/AG(LIV)/280)  
12.1.   The Chairman  noted  that, in relation to that agenda item, the Chairman of the CTD had 
provide d the General Council with a report on the CTD's consideration of the report of the Joint 
Advisory Group on the International Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO.   
12.2.   Ambassador Muhammad Mujtaba Piracha (Pakistan), Chairman of the CTD , reported that t he 
ITC's Joint Advisory Group had held its 54th Session on 25 November 2020. The report on that 
meeting was contained in document ITC/AG( LIV)/280. The report had been  presented to the CTD at 
its 114th Session on 29 March by the Chairperson of the Joint Advisory Group, Ambassador Athaliah 
Lesiba Molokomme of Botswana. Ambassador Molokomme had informed the CTD that the Joint 
Advisory Group had reviewed the ITC's Annual Report for 2019. Some of the key results for 2019 
had included: 129 million  dollars ' worth  of delivery across all budgets , 302 million dollars 
extrabudgetary funds secured for 2020 and beyond , and a value of transacted business and mature 
international trade and investment deals facilitated by ITC amounting to 1 billion dollars.  
12.3.   Appreciation had been  expressed by the Joint Advisory Group for several areas of the ITC's 
work. Some of the areas highlighted had included the strengthening of agricultural value chains with 
an emphasis on quality improvements and standards , women 's econo mic empowerment , trade and 
investment facilitation , digital trade and e -commerce and regional economic integration – 
particularly in support of the African Continental Free Trade Area. The ITC 's work in trade promotion 
and market linkages through virtual t rade fairs and business meetings had been  applauded, as had 
been the organization's investments in youth empowerment, export strategies and trade and market WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 75 - 
 
  intelligence. Delegations had indicated their concern with the disproportionate impact of the COVID -
19 pandemic on micro, small and medium -sized enterprises, which they  had noted made ITC 's 
mandate more relevant. The organization had also been praised for its flexibility in adjusting its 
mode of delivery and working method by adapting contents and using digital tools.  
12.4.   Delegations had seen  a need to increase action in specific COVID -19-affected industries and 
across affected value chains , such a s tourism. Given the disproportionate impact of the pandemic 
on women, delegations had also s een an increased need for women 's economic empowerment 
through initiatives such as "SheTrades ", and had highlighted the digital economy as a particularly 
important  avenue to rebuild post -crisis economies. Funders had urged the ITC to continue delivering 
with flexibility in the future and had encouraged the organization to enhance communication with 
current and future partners and other trade and development organiza tions.  
12.5.    The ITC's 2020 Annual Evaluation Synthesis Report had been  presented. The report f ound 
that the ITC 's Results Framework br ought  consistency and convergence to the results sought and 
achieved. Projects evaluated had been  found to be aligned with cou ntries ' priorities and the needs 
of the different categories of ITC beneficiaries. The organization's "programmatic approach ", 
launched in 2016, had been  found to be bearing fruit, and ITC 's intervention model had been  found 
to be effective and reliable. A s was the practice, the CTD had taken  note of the report of the 54th 
Session of the Joint Advisory Group, and had agreed to forward it to the General Council for adoption.  
12.6.   The General Council adopted  the report of the Joint Advisory Group in document 
ITC/A G(54)/280 and took note  of the CTD Chairman's statement.  
12.7.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , welcomed the partnership with ITC and 
hoped to strengthen it moving forward. The LDC Group welcomed the ITC's commitment to support 
the LDCs in their quest for sustainable development and their efforts in the context of the COVID -
19 pandemic. The pandemic had shown that multilateral problems required multilateral solutions 
and had underlined the increasing inequalities among countries. The current  situation necessitated 
all Members to work together by drawing up roadmaps for building greater resilience and more 
balanced development. The LDCs would be working with the priorities pointed out by the United 
Nations, the recovery of their economies, sus tainable development, gender equality and seizing 
opportunities offered by digital technologies to help them overcome inequalities and to foster their 
development. The LDC Group had organi zed an initiative in the Aid for Trade review focusing on 
their resp onse to the pandemic , which was well appreciated. There had been interesting discussions 
which touched upon challenges in financing Aid for Trade and steps to encourage LDCs to build 
resilience through Aid for Trade. The LDCs hoped to continue that partner ship and to collaborate 
with ITC in moving forward which would help trade become a tool for the development of all LDCs.  
12.8.   The representative of Mauritius , on behalf of the African Group , commend ed ITC for pursuing 
the implementation of its projects which we re important for the upscaling of development in Africa, 
despite the difficult times due to the pandemic. The African Group  welcome d particularly the 
partnership with UNCTAD regarding the "eTrade for all " initiative  and looked forward to the 
implementation  of the ITCs new "One Trade Africa " project in 2021 which w ould enhance access of 
MSMEs to regional markets. As a land of microenterprises which constitute d 90% of the business 
ecosystem and accounting for 80% of employment, the African Group highly value d ITC's 
intervention in the continent, especially reaching out to the vulnerable populations, including women 
and the youth. In th ose trying times, the African Group  encourage d ITC to look into means to help 
African countries rebuild their export competitiv eness, address the participation of MSMEs in global 
trade, make the most of regional markets and value chains in light of the coming into force of the 
AfCFTA. The African Group was convinced that the WTO, ITC and UNCTAD ha d a crucial role to play 
in empowe ring women and youth so that they c ould further engage in trade and, in time, expand 
into regional and global trade.  
12.9.   The representative of the European Union  noted that t he ITC was a valued partner to the 
European Union . The European Union  was very pleased with their cooperation to date and hope d to 
continue to work on projects and exchange information in response to emerging priorities and needs. 
The European Union congratulate d ITC on its work providing valuable support to global MSMEs hard 
hit by the impacts of COVID -19. MSMEs were at the core of not only the EU economy, but indeed 
the global economy, and as such they  should  be placed front and centre in the global recovery effort. 
Moreover, supporting MSMEs was not only about good jobs. The  majority of female entrepreneurs 
around the world own ed a small or medium -sized company. Supporting th ose companies mean t WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 76 - 
 
  guaranteeing a more inclusive and gender -equal recovery, while also supporting the objectives of 
the Buenos Aires Declaration on Wome n and Trade. The European Union  strongly support ed the 
ITC's "Green to Compete " strategy to support MSMEs in building back better and greener. The 
European Union  would continue supporting ITC work.  ITC could continue counting on the E uropean 
Union to advan ce the work in making global supply chains greener and more sustainable.  
12.10.   The representative of Norway  appreciate d the efforts of ITC to adjust its program mes to 
deliver technical assistance in times of crisis. The most vulnerable were hit the hardest. In the midst 
of the pandemic with its devastating social and economic consequences, th at was more important 
than ever. Nothing dr ove poverty reduction as much as access to good s, steady jobs and living 
wages. Trade was essential for revenue generation and job s, and a key part of the recovery. After 
the meeting of the Joint Advisory Group, Norway had signed a new multi -year agreement with ITC 
for EUR 4.5 millio n. Norway 's contribution was not earmarked and was allocated in its entirety to 
Window 1.  
12.11.   The representative of Kenya  said that ITC ha d made an invaluable contribution to 
international trade and development particularly in the context of the work of the WTO and UNCTAD 
in their endeavour to create an inc lusive and sustainable multilateral trading system. ITC ha d been 
instrumental in supporting MSMEs in many developing countries and LDCs to integrate in the global 
value chains, supporting women's economic empowerment, trade facilitation, digital trade and 
regional economic integration. In Africa, ITC ha d been at the forefront in the negotiation, conclusion 
and unveiling of the agreement establishing the African Continental Free Trade Area. ITC ha d been 
cardinal in its implementation. ITC ha d also been activ e during the COVID -19 pandemic providing 
insight and guidance to small businesses as they f ound ways to cope with the operational stress 
generated by COVID -19. For instance, the 2020 Action Plan for supporting small businesses through 
the COVID -19 crisis a nd towards the future ha d been helpful in supporting MSMEs during the crisis 
and allowing them to be at the forefront in generating resilience, inclusiveness , sustainability and 
future growth.  
12.12.   The pandemic remain ed a real threat to the survival of many MS MEs in developing countries. 
More therefore needed to be done to support them to weather th at protracted storm. In addition to 
the pandemic, climate change and the attendant natural calamities were also drawback s to the 
economic and social development of m any developing countries. Kenya therefore welcome d the 
timely inclusion of SDG 13 on climate change to ITC's portfolio of indicators and mainstreaming 
environmental sustainability across its interventions. Kenya also commend ed ITC's initiatives to 
promote circular economy as th at had a positive impact on the environment, job creation and the 
attainment of SDGs. Kenya  appreciate d the role of ITC in trade policy , particularly the integration of 
MSMEs, youth and women in trade. The efforts towards environmenta l sustainability was in relation 
to trade and call ed for more support to ITC to enable it to further advance its programmes and make 
more enterprises internationally competitive.  
12.13.   The representative of the International Trade Centre , speaking as an Observer , thank ed the 
Members particularly Chad (LDCs), Mauritius (African Group), the European Union, Norway and 
Kenya for taking the floor and for their statements of support and encouragement. ITC was very 
pleased. More than one year into the COVID -19 pandemic, Members'  words reaffirm ed that ITC's 
role was even more crucial than before as the whole world , particularly the developing countries and 
their MSMEs were working hard to overcome its socio -economic consequences and to recover in a 
sustainable man ner. 2020 ha d been a year of adjustments and readjustments for ITC and their 
beneficiaries. ITC had to be flexible and adaptable  and had invested significantly to deliver through 
remote, online and hybrid models while develop ing contingency plans with its beneficiaries and 
funders. Th at had indeed paid off. To its funders, ITC thank ed them for sustaining their financial 
support and continued commitment even at th ose trying times.  
12.14.   In 2021, ITC would build on the lessons learned from 2020  as its focus w ould remain fully 
on recovery and building resilience of its beneficiary counterparts. ITC would go deeper on gender 
equality, environmental protection, youth empowerment, e -commerce and w ould bring new insights, 
innovation and methodologies to address climate c hange, strengthen circular economy, develop 
digital solutions and help rebuild the tourism and agri -business value chains that ha d particularly 
been affected. ITC would work more closely with the WTO under the leadership of Dr. Ngozi and 
contribute in many  areas – from investment, trade facilitation, gender and trade, e -commerce 
particularly by bringing in the voice of MSMEs and translating WTO discussions and agreements into 
operational priorities on the ground. In 2021 , ITC would  be planning for its next Strategic Plan that WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 77 - 
 
  would run from 2022  to 2025. ITC would be holding consultations with  all Members  and look ed 
forward to their feedback. ITC remain ed committed to serving its Members through both the WTO 
and the UN Development System.  
12.15.   The Director -General  was pleased to hear the positive comments from Members on the work 
of ITC. She had been opportune to see very good work of ITC and the WTO together on the ground 
in Nigeria w orking with groups of women to upgrade the quality of their products so they could break 
into export markets where they had not had access to due to SPS issues. That was one of the best 
things she had ever seen since she had  taken that job nine weeks ago o f what c ould be done on the 
ground working together. She commend ed ITC and had been meeting Ms. Pamela Coke -Hamilton to 
talk about how to work together better – to help build back better from th e crisis particular ly for  
women and MSMEs. She saw a lot of go od opportunities  and hoped ITC and the WTO  would be able 
to work on th ose and achieve results for the benefit of the people . 
12.16.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
13  COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION – REPORT ON MEETING OF 
MARCH 2021 (WT/BFA/193)  
13.1.   The Chairman  drew attention to the report in WT/BFA/193 and invite d Ambassador Bettina 
Waldmann (Germany), Chair of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administ ration, to introduce 
them.  
13.2.   Ambassador Bettina Waldmann (Germany), Chair of the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration , focused her remarks  on the report of the CBFA meeting of 8 March bearing the 
reference WT/BFA/193  and gave some highlights of th e carry -over of discussions from the meeting.  
13.3.   On the 2021 Work Plan, the Committee had discussed the draft work plan for the year. The 
WTO and ITC budget proposal for 2022 -2023 w ould be presented in June. The goal was to ensure 
adequate time for in -depth deliberations and a recommendation made for approval in time before 
the end of the year. Other topics to be discussed th at year include d the management of WTO trust 
funds, and strategic planning and horizontal coordination within the Secretariat. On the 20 21 Salary 
Scale, the Director -General ha d a mandate to approve the salary scales for each year. No adjustment 
had been  made to the salary scale for 2021. Thus, it remain ed the same as that for 2020.  
13.4.   On the Status Update on the Implementation of External A udit Recommendations, the 
external auditors perform ed two audits every year: a financial audit and a performance audit. The 
update given at the CBFA had been  that 12 out of 38 recommendations were still open. The 
implementation of the remaining 12 recommen dations was in progress. An update w ould be provided 
in the Audit Report for the 2020 Annual Financial Statements.  
13.5.   On the Contributions from Members and Observers, the Secretariat had notified the 
Committee that contribution s received from Members for 2020  had been  significantly lower than in 
2019, 84% in 2020 relative to 92% in 2019. There had been  11 Members subject to administrative 
measures as of 31 December 2020. For Observers, the amount of outstanding contributions had 
been slightly  lower than for 2019. Five Observers had been  under administrative measures as of 
31 December 2019. The measures in place to follow up on arrears include d sending reminder letters 
several times during the year and regular follow -up with Member focal points by phone and e -mail. 
Some delegations had called for further steps to ensure transparency with regard to the iss ue of 
arrears, including in the context of reporting to the General Council. The Committee on Budget, 
Finance and Administration ma de the following recommendation to the General Council:  
"The Committee invites the General Council to urge Members and Observ ers under 
Administrative Measures to liquidate their arrears."  
13.6.   On Coherence in the Establishment and Management of WTO Trust Funds, the topic was of 
key interest and had come up during several Committee meetings in the previous year. Members 
had emphasized  the importance of implementation plans based on consultations with both 
beneficiaries and contributors , transparent and regular reporting , avoiding unnecessary proliferation 
of trust funds and oversight of specific trust funds by Members. Further discussi ons were continuing WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 78 - 
 
  in a small group process open to all delegations. Alicia Goujon from Mexico was helping her lead that 
process.  Updates would be provided at future meetings of the General Council.  
13.7.   On the Proposed Financial Regulation for the Continuatio n of Operations Pending the Approval 
of the Budget, discussions had taken place in 2020  regarding a proposal to modify Financial 
Regulation 10 to provide a transition rule for situations where approval of the budget was still 
pending at the end of the year . Those discussions were continuing in 2021 . Key areas of focus were: 
(1) the kind of expenditure that c ould be incurred during any interim period , (2) reporting to 
Members , (3) the period of interim authority and (4) assessment of contributions. Following  a 
constructive discussion of the topic at the meeting of the CBFA held on 19 April, she had  invited 
interested Members to consult with her to gather further information and respond to any questions.  
She would use CBFA meetings to provide transparency for  delegations who were not actively 
participating.   
13.8.   On the After -Service Health Insurance, the cost of the medical insurance plan was split 60%  
/ 40% between the WTO budget and  members of the plan. The so -called ASHI (After Service Health 
Insurance) liability was an estimate of the future costs. The overarching point conveyed by the 
Secretariat at the 8  March CBFA meeting had been  that the liability was very significant and ha d no 
underlying assets to fund it. Due to an aging population and medical inflation that was higher than 
general inflation, the liability forecast was to grow steadily over the coming years. The long -term 
cost implications for the budget require d an actuarial  study which was not undertaken every year. 
The next such valuation w ould be done in 2021.  
13.9.   On Procedural Improvements for CBFA work, the Committee had discussed a proposal relating 
to procedural improvements in the operation of the CBFA. She reported that the CBFA had adopted 
the proposal at its meeting held on 19  April. 
13.10.   The General Council approved  the Budget Committee's specific recommendation in 
paragraph 5.11 of WT/BFA/193 urging Members and Observers under Administrative Measures to 
liquidate their arr ears, took note  of the CBFA Chair's statement and adopted  the report in 
WT/BFA/193.  
14  OTHER BUSINESS  
14.1  Statement by the Chairman in connection with Administrative Measures for 
Members in arrears  
14.1.   The Chairman , speaking under "Other Business ", noted that the rev ised Administrative 
Measures for Members in arrears in WT/BFA/132 required that, at the end of each meeting of the 
General Council, the Chair of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration should provide 
information with regard to which Members and  Observers were under Administrative Measures.  
14.2.   Ambassador Bettina Waldmann (Germany), Chair of the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration , recalled that t he Administrative Measures applicable to Members and Observers with 
arrears in contribution h ad been in place since 1 March 2013. In accordance with the decision of the 
General Council, she should state all Members and Observers under all categories of administrative 
measures. As at 4 May 2021, there had been  21 Members and 9 Observers under Admin istrative 
Measures. The following 10 Members were currently in Category I: Argentina; Belize; Plurinational 
State of Bolivia; Djibouti; Gabon; Mauritania; Papua New Guinea; Suriname; Togo and Yemen. The 
following 2 Members were in Category II: Cuba and Gui nea. The following 9 Members were in 
Category III: Antigua and Barbuda; Burundi; Central African Republic; Chad; Congo; Democratic 
Republic of the Congo; Guinea -Bissau; Senegal and Bolivarian State of Venezuela.  The following 
5 Observers were in Category I: Comoros  (Observer ); Iran (Observer); Iraq (Observer); Lebanese 
Republic  (Observer) and Sudan  (Observer). There was only one Observer in Category II: Syria n 
Arab Republic  (Observer). The following 3 Observers were in Category III: Libya  (Observe r); São 
Tomé and Príncipe (Observer) and Somalia  (Observer).  
14.3.   The Chairman  said that he was required at each Council meeting to request Members and 
Observers in Categories II and III of the Measures to inform the Secretariat as to when their payment 
of arre ars could be expected.  WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 79 - 
 
  14.4.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
_______________  
 WT/GC/M/191  
 
- 80 - 
 
  ANNEX 1  
STATEMENTS BY COLOMBIA ON TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS (AGENDA ITEM 4), ON THE 
WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE AND MORATORIUM ON THE IMPOSING 
CUSTOMS DUTIES ON ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSIONS – REQUEST FROM INDIA  (AGENDA 
ITEM 7) AND ON THE PAPER ENTITLED "THE LEGAL STATUS OF 'JOINT STATEME NT 
INITIATIVES' AND THEIR NEGOTIATED OUTCOMES" – REQUEST FROM INDIA AND 
SOUTH AFRICA  (AGENDA ITEM 8)  
At its request, the statement s of the delegation of  Colombia on Agenda Items 4, 7 and 8  are included 
below as part of the Minutes of the General Council me eting.  
 
_______________  
 
 
4 TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS  
 
A. STATUS REPORT ON THE CONSIDERATIONS BY THE TRIPS COUNCIL ON THE "PROPOSAL 
FOR A WAIVER FROM CERTAIN PROVISIONS OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT FOR THE 
PREVENTION, CONTAINMENT AND TREATMENT OF COVID -19" (IP/C/W/669)  - STATEMENT 
BY THE CHAIR OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRIPS  
 
I am making this brief intervention to express our support for the report presented by 
Ambassador  Dagfinn Sørli as Chair of the Council for TRIPS. The text reflects in a factual manner 
the discussions and outcomes that have taken place in the Council.  I would also like to take this 
opportunity to reiterate Colombia's commitment to the search for a coordinated response to the 
global health crisis caused by COVID -19 and the economic effects ar ising from measures taken to 
contain it.  We are convinced that the WTO will be instrumental in ensuring a concerted response, 
from the technical level, necessary for overcoming bottlenecks in global production and distribution 
chains for vaccines and medic ines. As we have reiterated on various occasions, this concerted 
response should contain elements in the areas identified as priorities: intellectual property, export 
restrictions and direct dialogue with producers in the pharmaceutical industry.  Colombia welcomes 
the developments of the past few weeks and is more than willing to participate in the negotiations 
based on the proposed text.  
_______________  
 
 
7 WORK PROGRAMME ON ELECTRONIC COMMERCE AND MORATORIUM ON THE 
IMPOSING CUSTOMS DUTIES ON ELECTRONIC TR ANSMISSIONS – REQUEST FROM 
INDIA  
 
I would like to thank India for its interest in the topic, and join those Members who have already 
taken the floor in expressing our interest in ensuring a further extension of the moratorium on 
e-commerce, as well as in r einvigorating the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, as agreed 
at MC11.  We firmly believe in the positive effect that the moratorium has on enterprises' exports, 
especially for MSMEs, as well as on the development of a globally competitive software ind ustry. We 
hope that the importance will continue to be given to ensuring the two moratoriums to be examined 
at the next Ministerial Conference are treated consistently.  
 
_______________  
 
 
8 PAPER ENTITLED "THE LEGAL STATUS OF 'JOINT STATEMENT INITIATIVES' AND 
THEIR NEGOTIATED OUTCOMES" – REQUEST FROM INDIA AND SOUTH AFRICA 
(WT/GC/W/819/REV.1)  
 
We would like to reiterate our support for and commitment to the discussions that are taking place 
in the various joint initiatives on e -commerce, invest ment facilitation for development, services 
domestic regulation and MSMEs.  Our position on the discussion paper is well known, and we would 
simply like to reiterate our statement made under the same agenda item at the last informal session 
on 30  March.  
__________