RESTRICTEDWORLD TRADE
ORGANIZATIONWT/L/319
8 October 1999
(99-4228)
Original:  English
G15 MINISTERIAL MEETING IN PREPARATION FOR THE THIRD
MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE OF THE WTO AT SEATTLE
17-18 August 1999, Bangalore, India
Chairman's Summary
Communication from India
The following communication was received from the Permanent Mission of India with the
request that it be circulated to Members.
_______________
1. The Ministerial Meeting of the Group of Fifteen, in preparation for the Third Ministerial
Conference of the WTO at Seattle, was held  at Bangalore, India on 17-18 August 1999.  His
Excellency Mr. Ramakrishna Hegde, Commerce Minister of India, chaired the meeting.
2. India hosted this preparatory Meeting in pursuance of the decisions taken at the IX Summit of
the Heads of State and Government of the Gr oup of Fifteen at Montego Bay, Jamaica in
February 1999. Reaffirming the importance of a transparent, fair and equitable rule-based multilateral
trading system under the WTO, the Summit had highlighted the legitimacy of the development
objectives of developing countries.  The Summit had stressed the need to preserve economic spaceswithin the multilateral trading system to implement market oriented development policies as well as
the need for full implementation of the special a nd differential provisions in the WTO Agreements.
3. Against the backdrop of the above guidelines provided by the Montego Bay Summit, the
delegates had detailed discussions with reference to the current stage of preparations at Geneva.  The
objective was to ensure that the interests of developing countries were fully taken on board and thatthe gains of the multilateral trading system contributed positively to the economic development of
developing countries.  The discussions were structured into five sessions in line with the work
programme established during the Second Ministerial Conference of the WTO at Geneva.
4. In the first Session, the focus was on issues and concerns arising out of implementation of
existing Agreements, as well as mandated negotiations and mandated reviews referred to inparagraph  9(a) of the Geneva Ministerial Declaration.  The delegates attached utmost importance to
redressing the difficulties faced by developing countries in the implementation of the WTO
Agreements. It was observed that only by meaningful addressing the implementation issues and
concerns, can it be ensured that developing countries, and especially the least-developed amongst
them, secure a share in the growth of intern ational trade, commensurate with their economic
development needs.
5. The delegates recognized three facets of implementational issues and concerns.  The first is
the removal of inequities in the existing agreements to restore the balance of rights and obligationsWT/L/319
Page 2
forged in the Uruguay Round.  Second is the non-realization of benefits by many developing countries
in areas of interest to them, such as the agriculture and the textiles and clothing sectors, because of the
failure of developed countries to fulfill their obligations in spirit.  Third is the special and differential
provisions in the Uruguay Round Agreements, which have remained unimplemented.  These
provisions, including those of a best endeavour nature, have to be operationalized if the developingcountries are to derive the intended benefits of these provisions.
6. Delegates noted that developing countries are facing difficulties in effective and timely
implementation of their commitments because of resource and institutional constraints and lack of
adequate technical assistance.  Several delegates also referred to many specific implementation
problems.  Non-operationalization of the transfer of technology provisions and lack of benefit sharing
on biological resources and traditional knowledge accessed for innovations under the TRIPS
Agreement, inability of developing countries to use regulations necessary to accelerate theirindustrialization process because of the TRIMs provisions and inability to use subsidies for
development and diversification and up grading due to the Subsidies Agreement were pointed out.
Similarly, special provisions in the Anti-Dumping Agreement, the Dispute Settlement Understanding
and the SPS and TBT Agreements meant to benefit developing countries, in this regard, reference was
made to the repeated and unreasonable imposition of anti-dumping and countervailing duties bydeveloped countries.  Also, lack of meaningful implementation of the Agreement on Textiles and
Clothing and non-reduction of tariffs in areas of interest to developing countries.
7. In the light of the concerns expressed, the delegates agreed that these issues were required to
be addressed appropriately in the preparatory process in Geneva on priority.  The delegates observed
that these issues flowed from the balance e xpected in the Uruguay Round and did not require
undertaking any new obligation by the developing countries.  In this regard, the delegates noted with
particular concern the problems being encountered by small and vulnerable economies.
8. Given the importance of finding effective solutions to the implementational problems faced
by developing countries, the delegates emphasized the need for adoption of coordinated and mutually
supportive positions by G-15 countries, particularly through their Geneva-based PermanentRepresentatives accredited to the WTO, with a view  to ensure that the necessary connective measures
are taken at the Seattle Ministerial.
9. On mandated negotiations in the Agreement on Agriculture, the delegates observed that any
delay in pursuing further liberalization is unwarranted.  They highlighted the need to work towards
introducing greater equity and balance in the Agreement and dismantling of trade-distorting measures.
The importance of providing necessary flexibility to developing countries for the adoption of
domestic policies with the intention of improving the general levels of production for achieving foodsecurity and enhancing the income levels of the rural poor through assured rural employment was
recognized.  The delegates expressed serious concern about the lack of implementation of the decision
taken at Marrakesh regarding net-food importing developing countries.
10. The delegates agreed that in the services se ctor, there was need to maintain the existing
structure of the Agreement on Trade in Services and emphasized the importance of the concept ofprogressive liberalization already incorporated in it.  Importance was laid in the discussions on the
liberalization of areas of interest to developing countries, particularly the need for more substantial
commitments by developed countries under Mode 4, namely, movement of natural persons.
11. Delegates recalled that developing counties, including several G-15 members. showed
flexibility at the First Ministerial Meeting in Singapore in agreeing to launch an educative programmeon certain new subjects like trade and investment, trade and competition policy, trade facilitation and
transparency in government procurement.  The second Session covered these issues.WT/L/319
Page 3
12. The work on trade and investment had shown that the issue was complex and multifaceted.
Given the complexity of the task, Members of the OECD had not been able to reach any agreement on
a discipline on investment.  Several delegations while noting that developing countries had been
pursuing an autonomous policy of investment. liberalization suited to their specific needs emphasized
that this trend should be allowed to evolve.  They felt that the study and analysis carried out by theWorking Group had so far had not been able to establish the need to develop a multilateral set of rules
on investment in the WTO.  A few delegations, however said that while they were not demandeurs of
a multilateral regime in this areas they could go along with a consensus.
13. On competition policy, delegates were of the view that it would be premature to talk of a
multilateral competition framework at present, given the complexities of the issue shown during the
discussions in the WTO working group, which was still in an analytical phase.  Delegates also
emphasized the need to address the issue of restrict ive business practices by transnational corporations
as well as anti-competitive effects of certain trade remedial measures.  The delegates rejected any
move to gradually multilateralize the existing plurilateral Government Procurement Agreement.
While discussing possible transparency related disciplines, they observed that certain elements of the
scope of the issue also required further consideration.  Delegates observed that facilitation issues were
already reflected in various WTO Agreements like Customs Valuation, Rules of Origin, etc., and thiswas a systemic issue, which Members could autonomously pursue.
14. The third Session was devoted to integration of least-developed countries (LDCs) into the
multilateral trading system.  Delegates recalled that in the last Summit of Heads of State and
Government of the G-15 held at Jamaica, full implementation of the measures agreed at the WTO
High-Level Meeting for LDCs had been urged.  It was noted with concern that implementation of theIntegrated Framework for LDCs had fallen short of expectations, and LDCs had yet to obtain tangible
results.  It was recognized that urgent steps we re needed to integrate such economies into the
multilateral trading system.
15. Over and above the Singapore issues, there are certain other issues, which are being suggested
for inclusion into the negotiating agenda of the WTO.  These include issues such as industrial tariffs,electronic commerce, trade and environment, transparency in WTO functioning and global policy
coherence.  There are even attempts to reintroduce the Social Clause. The fourth Session was devoted
to these new issues.
16. The delegates observed that the benefits of tariff reduction commitments undertaken in the
last round have not accrued to the developing countries to the extent anticipated, in view of the
prevalence of tariff peaks, tariff escalations and non-tariff barriers in respect of items of particular
interest to developing countries.  Some delegations  therefore, were not in favour of a new round of
tariff negotiations.  Certain delegations stated that in order to address these issues they would favour
negotiations on industrial tariff reductions, without excluding any industrial sectors. Some delegations
said that while they were not demandeurs  of such negotiations, they were not opposed to it either.
Certain other delegations said that while tariff peaks and tariff escalations were a matter of concern to
them they were not very sure whether the develope d countries would be willing and able to dismantle
tariff peaks and tariff escalations even in a new round of tariff negotiations.  It was observed that the
issues of tariff peaks, tariff escalations and non-tariff barriers in the developed countries overhanging
from the Uruguay Round must be addressed effectively for market access to be meaningful.  Many
delegations affirmed the need for due credit to tariff reductions already effected autonomously by
developing countries.  Many delegations strongly opposed any concept of standstill on tariff reductionbased on applied tariffs or a commitment to harmonize tariffs.
17. On electric commerce, it was noted that a work programme to examine all trade-related issues
relating to global electronic commerce has been launched.  This work programme has identified many
complexities involved in electronic commerce.  Many delegates emphasized the need to look atWT/L/319
Page 4
electronic commerce from the perspective of developing countries and the need to address the
important issues raised in the work programme.
18. Most delegates agreed that environment is ab initio a non-trade issue, and that all legitimate
environmental concerns can be accommodated within the existing WTO provisions, including Article
XX of GATT 1994.  Delegates agreed that the work programme in the Committee on Trade andEnvironment (CTE) should continue.  Since trade is  seldom at the root of environmental problems,
they were particularly concerned with attempts to give legitimacy to protectionism in the garb of
environmental concerns.  Delegates urged the Ministers at Seattle to clearly recognize that
environmental standards differ from country to country and that the solution lies in mutual recognition
of only product-related standards rather than harmonization of environmental standards.  In order to
show the mutual supportiveness of trade and en vironment, trade distortive agricultural export
subsidies should be removed by the developed countries and biological resources and traditionalknowledge of indigenous communities should be respected in WTO rules and benefits arising out of
their use equitably shared with them.  The delegates should also recommend that in cases of
proprietary technologies or substances mandated for use by international agreements or national
environmental laws, owners of intellectual property should be required to sell them at fair and most
favourable terms and conditions.
19. It was noted that some WTO Members are pressing for institutional reforms and greater
"transparency" in the dispute settlement proceedings of WTO and for unrestricted access to WTO
documents.  It was observed that the dispute settlement process is a Government-to-Government
exercise and therefore, there is a need to maintain confidentiality at all stages of the proceedings.
Allowing observers to be present in the meetings of the Panel and the Appellate Body, making itobligatory to publicize the various submissions of the parties during the hearing and allowing
submission of amicus curiae briefs would prejudice an objective and legal examination of issues as
well as result in a situation where non-members acquire better rights than Members not parties to the
dispute.  Thus, the issue here is not as much of "transparency" as of the timing of disclosure of
documents and of dispute settlement proceedings.
20. The call by some developed countries for a greater coherence between WTO and other
intergovernmental organizations was noted.  It was noted that the Marrakesh Ministerial Declaration
ruled against the imposition of any cross conditionalities or additional conditions being imposed by
such organizations.  Delegates observed that initiatives towards greater coherence need to be viewed
with caution.  It was agreed that closer relationship between institutions can not relieve Members of
the WTO from their own responsibility to keep markets open and avoid recourse to trade distorting
measures.  In particular, it cannot discharge the obligation of the Membership to build thedevelopment dimension into the fabric of trade agreements, as undertaken in the preamble of the
Marrakesh Declaration.  It was also agreed that initiatives on coherence should not be used to reduce
the policy options now open to developing countries to pursue their developmental needs.
21. The delegations rejected any linkage between trade and core labour standards.  They recalled
that this issue had been finally settled in the Singapore Ministerial Declaration.  They decided toresolutely oppose any renewed attempt to raise this issue in the WTO.
22. All delegates agreed that the resolution of th e implementation issues and concerns should be
treated as a priority issue in the Seattle Ministerial Conference.  Many delegates expressed the view
that mandated negotiations and mandated reviews should constitute the core agenda for the next round
of negotiations.  It was stated by many delegates that overloading of the agenda would definitelycause delay in the fructification of negotiations as happened in the Uruguay Round.  Regarding the
issue of a single undertaking, most delegations were of the view that it has both advantages and
disadvantages and that a final view could be taken only after the scope of negotiations is determined.
Most delegates did not want creation of any new bodies for negotiations as the developing countriesWT/L/319
Page 5
have limited resources to participate effectively.  Delegates stated that the form of the Seattle
Declaration should be clear and unambiguous to avoid the risk of possible misinterpretations.  All
delegations agreed that the final outcome of the Seattle Ministerial Conference should be based on
consensus.
23. Noting that G-15 members have made a number of proposals in the "process" established in
the General Council, delegates observed convergence of their core concern to fully and meaningfully
implement the special and differential provisions built into the existing agreements in order to ratchet
the balance of rights and obligations sought to have been realized during the Uruguay Round without
expecting developing countries to give any further concessions.  The Chairman recommended that
G-15 should actively coordinate their positions to adopt a uniform approach on issues of common
concern and pursue the same specific WTO negotiations.
24. In conclusion the Meeting reaffirmed its commitment to a rule-based and equitable
multilateral trading system resulting in full integrat ion of developing countries into the system for
their economic development and for global trade expansion.  The Meeting reiterated the importance of
greater and easier market access for the products of interest to developing countries.
25. The Meeting expressed deep shock at the loss of lives in the earthquake that hit Turkey on
17 August 1999, and offered their condolences to the Government and the people of Turkey on thistragedy.
__________