RESTRICTED  
  
WT/GC/M/208  
 
19 March  2024 
(24-2406) Page: 1/162 
General Council  
13-15 December 2023  Original: English  
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING  
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD AND IN VIRTUAL FORMAT  
ON 13 -15 DECEMBER 2023  
Chairperson: H.E. Dr.  Athaliah Lesiba Molokomme  (Botswana)  
The Chairperson, the Director -General and delegations welcomed H.E. Dr. Thani bin Ahmed Al 
Zeyoudi, Minister of State for Foreign Trade of the United Arab Emirates  and Chairperson of the 
Thirteenth WTO Ministerial Conference . They also bade farewell to Ambassador  George Mina 
(Australia) ; Ambassador Yamazaki Kazuyuki (Japan) ; Ambassador  Federico Villegas  (Argentina); 
Ambassador  Chuquihuara Chil  (Peru); and  expressed appreciation for their valuable contributions.  
 
Subjects discussed1: 
1   REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE TRAD E NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE AND 
REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL  ................................ ................................ ..............  4 
2   THIRTEENTH SESSION OF THE MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE  ................................ ........  4 
A. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS  ................................ ................................ .........................  4 
(i) Election of Officers  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 6 
(ii) Request for Observer Status by Pales tine ................................ ................................ ...... 6 
3   FOLLOW -UP TO OUTCOMES OF MINISTERIAL CONFERENCES  ................................ ...... 7 
A. MC12  ................................ ................................ ................................ ........................  7 
(i) WTO Reform – "Reform by Doing" - Statement by Chairperson  ................................ ........  7 
(ii) Paragraph 24 of the Ministerial Declaration on the WTO Response to the COVID -19  
Pandemic and Preparedness for Future Pandemics  ................................ ................................ .. 8 
(iii) Paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement – Duration of extended 
deadline  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............................  8 
- Decision text on extension of the 17 June 2022 Ministerial Decision to COVID -19 
Therapeutics and Diagnostics – Communication from South Africa  ................................ ............  9 
(iv) Work Programme on Electronic Commerce  ................................ ................................ ...24 
- Report by the Facilitator  ................................ ................................ ............................. 24 
- Challenges for Digital Industrialization In Developing Countries – Communication from  
South Africa  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................... 25 
- Draft Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce -  
Communication from Australia; Canada; Chile; Costa Rica; Georgia; Hong Kong, China;  
Iceland; Israel; Korea, Republic of; Liechtenstein; Moldova, Republic of; Montenegro;  
Norway; New Zealand; Paraguay; Peru; Singapore; Switzerland; Separate Customs Territory  
of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen And Matsu; Ukraine and The United Kingdom  ................................ .26 
 
1 The proposed agenda was circulated in document WT/GC/W/917 . WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 2 - 
 
  - Draft Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce –  
Communication from South Africa  ................................ ................................ ........................ 26 
B. BUENOS AIRES (MC11), NAIROBI (MC10) AND BALI (MC9)  ................................ ............ 44 
4   WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON  
OF THE DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT  ........  47 
5   THE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE ASPECTS OF COTTON - PERIODIC REPORT BY  
THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL  ................................ ................................ ...............................  52 
6   TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS  ................................ ................................ .........................  58 
A. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL COMPULSORY LICENSING SYSTEM – PARAGRAPH  7  
OF THE ANNEX TO THE AMENDED TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE DECISION  
ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PARAGRAPH 6 OF THE DOHA DECLARATION ON THE TRIPS 
AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH – REPORT OF THE  COUNCIL FOR TRIPS  ............................... 58 
B. PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION ON AN EXTENSION OF THE PERIOD FOR THE ACCEPTANCE  
BY MEMBERS OF THE PROTOCOL AMENDING THE TRIPS AGREEMENT  ................................ ......58 
7   COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION – REPORTS ON  
MEETINGS OF 17 OCTOBER AND 22 NOVEMBER 2023  ................................ ....................  60 
8   WTO PENSION PLAN – AMENDMENT TO THE REGULATIONS  ................................ ...... 64 
9   LDC GRADUATION (ANNEX  2 OF WT/GC/W/807/REV.2) – REPORT BY THE 
CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT TO THE  
GENERAL COUNCIL  ................................ ................................ ................................ .........  64 
10   PROPOSED REVISIONS TO WT/L/452 "PROCEDURES FOR THE CIRCULATION  
AND DERESTRICTION OF WTO DOCUMENTS" – COMMUNICATION FROM AUSTRALIA; 
BRAZIL; CANADA; COLOMBIA; COSTA RICA; EUROPEAN UNION; NEW ZEALAND; 
NORWAY; SWITZERLAND; SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, 
KINMEN AND MATSU; THE UNITED KINGDOM AND THE UNITED STATES  .......................  72 
11   MC13 – IMMEDIATE STEPS TO RESPOND TO FOOD INSECURITY –  
COMMUNICATION FROM SINGAPORE  ................................ ................................ ............  74 
12   PROPOSED MINISTERIAL DECLARATION FOR THE THIRTEENTH MINISTERIAL 
CONFERENCE: STRENGTHENING REGULATORY COOPERATION TO REDUCE  
TECHNICAL BARRIERS TO TRADE – COMMUNICATION FROM CAMEROON; CHINA; 
JORDAN; MACAO, CHINA; MYANMAR AND SEYC HELLES  ................................ .................  85 
13   DRAFT MINISTERIAL DECISION ON PROMOTING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION  
AND TRADE IN NFID CS AND LDCS - REQUEST FROM THE AFRICAN GROUP  ....................  90 
14   DRAFT MINISTERIAL DECISION ON SPS MEASURES - REQUEST FROM THE  
AFRICAN GROUP  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............  96 
15   TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND ECONOMIC RESILIENCE – REQUEST FROM THE 
AFRICAN GROUP  ................................ ................................ ................................ ............  99 
16   THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE MULTILATERAL TRADING SYSTEM TO  
SUSTAINABLE AND RESILIENT AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SYSTEMS – STATEMENT  
BY THE CAIRNS GROUP  ................................ ................................ ...............................  105  
17   EUROPEAN UNION REGULATION ON SUPPLY CHAINS FREE FROM  
DEFORESTATION AND FOREST DEGRADA TION – COMMUNICATION FROM  
ARGENTINA, COLOMBIA, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, GUATEMALA, HONDURAS,  
PANAMA, PARAGUAY, AND PERU  ................................ ................................ ..................  113  
18   INFORMATION ON INVESTMENT FACILITATION FOR DEVELOPMENT –  
REQUEST FROM CHILE AND THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA  ................................ ................  123  
19   ENHANCING MULTILATERAL DELIBERATIVE FUNCTION ON ENVIRONMENT - 
RELATED TRADE MEASURES AND FOSTERING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT -  
REQUEST FROM CHINA AND COLOMBIA  ................................ ................................ ....... 134  
20   REVIEW OF THE EXEMPTION PROVIDED UNDER PARAGRAPH 3 OF GATT 1994  ..... 142  
21   WAIVERS UNDER ARTICLE IX OF THE WTO AGREEMENT  ................................ ....... 145  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 3 - 
 
  A. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2002 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES  
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION  ................................ ................................ ... 145 
B. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2007 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES  
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION  ................................ ................................ .... 145 
C. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2012 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES  
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION  ................................ ................................ .... 145 
D. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2017 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES  
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION  ................................ ................................ .... 145 
E. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2022 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES  
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION  ................................ ................................ .... 145 
F. REVIEW OF WAIVERS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE IX:4 OF THE WTO AGREEMENT  ................  146 
(i) Preferential treatment in favour of services and service suppliers of least developed 
countries, granted on 17  December  2011 until 31 December 2030  ................................ .........  146 
(ii) Preferential tariff treatment for least -developed countries, granted on 16  October  2019  
until 30  June 2029  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  146 
(iii) Cuba – Article XV:6 – Extension of waiver, granted on 23 November 2021 until  
31 December 2026  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  146 
(iv) United States – African Growth and Opportunity Act, granted on 30  November  2015  
until 30  September 2025  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 146 
(v) United States – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, granted on 16  October  2019  
until 30 September 2025  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 146 
(vi) United States – Former Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, granted on  
7 December  2016 until 31 December 2026 ................................ ................................ ..........  146 
(vii) United States – Trade Preferences granted to Nepal, granted on 7 December 2016 until 
31 December 2025  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  146 
22   INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE UNCTAD/WTO - REPORT OF THE JOINT  
ADVISORY GROUP ON ITS 57TH SESSION  ................................ ................................ ..... 147  
23   REVIEW OF WTO ACTIVITIES  ................................ ................................ ................  150  
(i) General Council, Dispute Settlement Body and Trade  Policy Review Body  .......................  150 
(ii) Sectoral Councils  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 150 
(iii) Committees  on Trade and Development, Trade and Environment, Balance -Of-Payments 
Restrictions, Budget, Finance and Administration and Regional Trade Agreements  ...................  150 
(iv) Working Groups on Trade, Debt and Finance, and Trade and Transfer  of Technology  ....... 150 
(v) Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements  ................................ ...................  150 
24   APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS TO WTO BODIES – ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE 
CHAIRPERSON PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 7.1(A) OF THE GUIDELINES  ......................  151  
25   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 151  
25.1   Statement by the Chairperson in connection with Administrative Measures for  
Members  in Arrears  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........  151 
ANNEX I  - STATEMENT BY DJIBOUTI, ON BEHALF OF THE LDC GROUP, DELIVERED  
AT THE CTG  MEETING ON 30 NOVEMBER 2023  ................................ .............................  153  
ANNEX II  - WRITTEN STATEMENTS BY THE DELEGATION OF INDIA –  
SUBSEQUENTLY SUBMITTED FOR INCLUSION IN THE RECORDS IN ADDITION TO  
THE ORAL STATEMENTS  ................................ ................................ ...............................  155  
 WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 4 - 
 
  1  REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE AND 
REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL  
1.1.   In taking up the first item "Report by the Chairperson of the Trade Negotiations Committee 
and Report by the Director -General" , the Chairperson  referred to the recent formal meeting of the 
Trade Negotiations Committee and an Informal Heads of Delegation meeting on Tuesday, 
12 December. Given the ex tensive discussions on Tuesday, she said that she did not expect a 
discussion under this item. She invited the Director -General , as Chairperson of the Trade 
Negotiations Committee , to say a few words.  
1.2.  The Director -General  and Chairperson of the Trade Negot iations Committee  delivered the 
following statement:  
1.3.  I do not  wish to say anything because we just had the TNC. The only reason I asked for the 
floor is to celebrate again those Members who recently ratified the Fishery Subsidies Agreement. 
Yesterday, we heard from the UK that they not only ratified but contributed  an unexpected  
GBP 1,000,000 to the Fishery Subsidies Fund, which is fantastic . In addition, Chile ratified , Gambia 
ratified . Now  we just got news that Barbados is on the verge of ratifying . This was news this morning 
from the Ambassador who stayed up until 2 a.m. to t ry to push and give us news. I want to recognize  
that effort and thank them most sincerely and celebrate them. I  am looking for more , especially 
over the holiday.  When we come back, I expect a lot of  good news.  
1.4.  The General Council took note  of the statement.  
2  THIRTEENTH SESSION OF THE MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE  
A. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS  
2.1.  The Chairperson  said that g iven the long agenda and the fact that she had  reported to the 
formal T NC and the informal HODs meetings on 12 December on the work underway on a possible 
MC13 outcome document, she would not repeat her report at this meeting  but would simply refer to 
the report issued in JOB/TNC/122 . She invite d delegations to use the end -of-year break to also 
further reflect on this work, so as to be able to  resume this process in the New Year in a 
solution -oriented and pragmatic manner. She count ed on everyone's cooperation.  
2.2.  Before tak ing up the administrative matters under this item, she t hanked the United Arab 
Emirates  for organizing the Mini -Ministerial on 11 December . She recognized the presence of  
H.E. Dr Thani bin Ahmed Al Zeyoudi, Minister of State for Foreign Trade of the United Arab Emirates, 
Chairperson of the Thirteenth Ministerial Conference, and invited him  to address the General Council.  
2.3.  H.E. Dr Thani bin Ahmed Al Zeyoudi, Minister of State for Foreign Trade of the United Arab 
Emirates, Chairperson of the Thirteenth Ministerial Conference , delivered the following stat ement:   
2.4.  It is really a pleasure to be here with you all and to meet you again at this meeting. As you all 
know , the past work and the amount of effort that has been done by all of you are great toward the 
success of the outcomes that are going to come out from the WTO and especially from MC13.  We are 
now less than 10 weeks away from MC13, including the break that we are going to have soon , and 
we urge everyone to continue their efforts to ensure that we are ready for MC13  at the end of 
February in Abu Dhabi . 
2.5.  For the last few months and after I assumed my role as the Chairperson of MC13, we have 
been in direct contact with many of your Ministers  and official delegations to ensure that we start 
the preparation for MC13. The feedback is very positive. The promi ses and the encouragement that 
we have been receiving from the officials are paving the way towards an outcome that we are going 
to be all proud of.  
2.6.  We also tried to host a few Mini-Ministerials . The first was held on 28 November , specifically 
on agricultu re, and the second  was on 11 December  in close coordination with the Secretariat and 
H.E. Dr. Ngozi Okonjo -Iweala  and with the Ministers representatives  of different groups and the 
attendance of the rest of the Members  listening to the discussions.  Our observations are very simple. 
First of all, most of the Ministers and representatives were reading from their remarks and that is WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 5 - 
 
  going to stick to the extreme positions that we have been hearing for quite some time. Seco nd, what 
we have been seeing from those engagements  is that  everyone is sticking to the process – not the 
substantial matter and content. I  would highly urge everyone to start shifting gears towards the 
technicalities and the content itself if we really wa nt to have an outcome that will serve the global 
community.  
2.7.  Earlier today, in Dubai, we concluded the COP2 8 with a huge success  – the success from the 
representatives of your nations . They achieved an outcome that has been negotiated for the last 
two weeks  and has reflected the interest s of everyone on a very complex topic that face s humanity 
nowadays. Whatever we are facing now, it is not as complex as climate change,  and I think we can 
do it together.  
2.8.  Another point that I want to highlight  is that  in the last few months I have been in direct contact 
and communication with many in the private sector , as part of my job as Minister of State for Foreign 
Trade and as Minister in charge of Investment before - and the only comments that I keep hearing  
are – we do  not know what the Ministerial meetings are doing. They are saying that they are not 
even consider ed in the discussion s and outcomes . As governments, we think that we are doing the 
right thing for the community , the business es and the private sector. So, we should engage them 
and hear their views to ensure that we reflect on the growth of global trade and the global businesses 
we would like to see.  
2.9.  So, as we are heading to MC13, I would like to lay out some of the plan for the upcoming few 
weeks. If there is any need for another Mini-Ministerial, we would  host it, but there is no plan for 
now to host any. The Ministerial meeting will start on 26 February and will end on 29 February. We 
are not planning to have a Senior Officials meeting for now. We are discussing it with both the 
Chairperson of the General Council and the Director -General of  the WTO, but we are still assessing 
the best modalities and way forward to ensure that we bring some of the technical discussions 
forward.  
2.10.   The team i n the other room is briefing the other representatives of your teams on the logistic al 
details . If there is anything which we can do as a host nation, we will be more than happy to do it. 
What we promise you  is that we are going to be very transparent and inclusive and  ensure that the 
whole meeting is bringing together everyone involved.  So, we are looking forward to work ing with 
you all  and hosting you all in Abu Dhabi.  
2.11.   The Chairperson  thanked H.E. Dr . Thani bin Ahmed Al Zeyoudi  for his address to the Cou ncil 
and said she looked forward to working with him intensively in the weeks ahead.  
2.12.   The Director -General  delivered the following statement:  
2.13.   Let me join the G eneral Council  Chairperson in welcoming H.E. Dr. Thani bin Ahmed Al 
Zeyoudi,  Minister of State for Foreign Trade of the United Arab Emirates and Chairperson of the 
Thirteenth WTO Ministerial Conference. I want you all to know that when we were in the UAE for 
COP28, he a nd Ambassador Abdelsalam Mohamed Al Ali  and their team went out of their way to 
make sure we had a real success. It was not easy. It was a huge place with lots going on and I must 
say that the UAE team was sterling. So that really made us feel good and giv es us a lot of hope for 
how I hope we will operate once we have MC13 on the ground. So, I want to say heartfelt thank you 
to the Minister, t he Ambassador and the entire team of the UAE.  
2.14.   The GC Chairperson and I have started to work closely with you, and yo u have also started 
to reach out and I hope you will be able to talk to as many of the Ambassadors as possible  – while 
keeping in close contact with the G eneral Council  Chair person  and I , as we move towards this 
preparation and , of course , with the Secreta riat. 
2.15.   Delegations may recall that, at our previous Ministerial Conference (MC12), we circulated the 
modalities of that Conference three weeks before Ministers arrived. The modalities document 
contained the programme and detailed explanations on how the mee tings would be conducted.  
2.16.   As delegations know well, the modalities of a Ministerial Conference are shaped by the 
membership, in particular, the state of play of work in negotiating groups and in Councils and 
Committees . Therefore, clarity on the sessions t hat we will have and the structure of the conference WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 6 - 
 
  itself will depend on the clarity we get from the negotiations and discussions amongst Members in 
the lead up to MC13.  
2.17.   As I urged at the TNC yesterday, let me reiterate my call to all Members to redoubl e efforts 
in bridging and closing as many gaps as possible here in Geneva to avoid a situation where Ministers 
have to engage in technical negotiations . We just had the same call from H .E. Minister Al Zeyoudi 
urging us to work here  in Geneva  and all of you , Excellencies, have said that you want to do that. 
Ambassadors and technical experts have stressed that delivering much of the result and leaving as 
few square brackets as possible is within your reach. So, I really urge you to do it and until we see 
what we can do, we will be watching to see how we can shape those modalities.  
2.18.   With this in mind, the MC13 Chairperson, the G eneral Council  Chairperson and I will continue 
to work together to ensure that we circulate the MC13 modalities in early February , which  will provide 
better clarity for planning and organization as we draw closer to the Conference. This will address 
the questions delegations have posed about Senior Officials' engagement, duration of the Conference 
and what will be expected of Ministers eac h day. Circulation of the modalities in early February 
should provide delegations  with enough time to brief capital while allowing the ongoing processes to 
significantly progress.  
(i) Election of Officers  
2.19.   The Chairperson  noted  that the Rules of Procedure (Rule 12) for the Ministerial Conference 
establish ed that "During the course of each regular session a Chairperson and three Vice -
Chairpersons shall be elected from among the Members. They shall hold office from the end of that 
session until the end of the next regular session." She recalled that i n July, the General Council had 
elected the MC13 Chairperson. Regarding the three Vice -Chairpersons, since the Chairperson w ould 
come from the Asian region, and in line with customary practice, she had  invited the representatives 
of the other three broad groupings – i.e., Africa; Latin America and the Caribbean (GRULAC); and 
developed countries – to consult with their constituencies in order to submit the names for the 
proposed MC13 Vice Chairpersons.  
2.20.   Consultations had been  conducted by the group coordinators, and further to this process, the 
Chairperson had sent a communication on 30 November informing all Members of the three proposed 
names for the appointment of the  MC13 Vice -Chairpersons. In th e commun ication, she had also 
proposed that, if no objections were received, the General Council would elect the proposed 
Vice-Chairpersons at the present meeting.  Following the communication, she had been  informed 
that H.E. Mr. Federico Alfaro Boyd of Panama was no longer in office. Since then, GRULAC ha d been 
consulting and  she had received a communication nominating H.E. Jorge Rivera Staff, Minister of 
Trade and Industry of the Republic of Panama , as proposed MC13 Vice -Chairperson. Since there ha d 
been no object ions with regard to the proposed nominations communicated on 30 November, which 
had already included Panama , she believed that the General Council was in a position to elect 
H.E. Mr. Luc Magloire Mbarga Atangana (Cameroon); Hon. Mr. Todd McClay (New  Zealan d); and 
H.E. Jorge Rivera Staff (Panama) as MC13 Vice -Chairpersons.  
2.21.   The General Council so agreed . 
(ii) Request for Observer Status by Palestine ( WT/L/1171 ) 
2.22.   In moving to the next sub -item "Request for Observer Status by Palestine", t he Chairperson  
drew the General Council's attention to the request for Observer status at MC13 by Palestine,  
circulated in WT/L/1171 . In accordance with customary practice, she ha d undertaken cons ultations, 
and it was her understanding that Members might be in a position to take action concerning this 
request.  Therefore, she proposed that the General Council agree to grant Palestine Observer Status 
at MC13 on an ad hoc  basis.  
2.23.   The General Council so agreed . WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 7 - 
 
  3  FOLLOW -UP TO OUTCOMES OF MINISTERIAL CONFERENCES  
A. MC12  
3.1.  The Chairperson  noted that the follow -up to MC12 was contained in sub -items 3.A.(i) -(iv) while 
sub-item 3.B. refer red to follow -up to previous Ministerial Conferences. She therefore proposed to 
first take up the matters listed under sub -item 3.A.(i) – (iii) and open the floor once. Thereafter, 
she would take up all matters under sub -item 3.A.(iv) and open the floor. Finally, she would  take up 
sub-item 3.B. and open the floor.  
(i) WTO Reform – "Reform by Doing" - Statement by Chairperson ( JOB/GC/359/Rev.2 ; 
G/L/1523 ) 
3.2.  The Chairperson  delivered the following statement2:  
3.3.  Since the beginning of the year, work has intensified in fulfilli ng Ministers' commitment at MC12 
to work towards necessary reform of the WTO in all its functions. During this period, my predecessor 
and I have updated Members on WTO reform work at every regular meeting of the General Council.  
3.4.  Colleagues, in 2023, Members remained actively engaged in the reform work. A plethora of 
proposals was tabled, and many innovative ideas were shared that enabled WTO reform work to 
advance. I commend all of you for your hard work in this regard.  
3.5.  This year , we had informal meetings on WTO reform focused on development in February, 
deliberative function and institutional matters in June, and trade and industrial policy in September. 
We likewise had deliberations on trade and environmental sustainability at t he Senior Officials' 
Meeting in October.  
3.6.  Following reform discussions on institutional matters, throughout the year, Members have 
emphasized the need to ensure meaningful Ministerial engagement during Ministerial Conferences. 
With MC13 fast approaching, th ere was demand from Members for the General Council Chairperson 
to establish a roadmap to guide the work in the lead up to MC13. In this regard, you may recall that 
I circulated in July a road map to MC13, which I further fleshed out following my consultat ions with 
Members in November.  
3.7.  Members continue to attach high priority to dispute settlement reform. You may recall that, in 
February 2023, Mr. Marco Molina of Guatemala started convening informal meetings on DS Reform 
with the objective of having substa nce-based discussions to find practical solutions to the concerns 
identified by Members. These discussions have intensified and, as I understand from the DSB 
Chairperson – Ambassador Ølberg, an agenda item dedicated to this matter will again be taken up 
at the DSB meeting on Monday, 18 December.  
3.8.  Reform -by-Doing work has also progressed this year. Notably, the Goods Council has adopted 
a report in G/L/1523  capturing 127 reforms that have been implemented to improve the functioning 
of the Goods Council and its 14 subsidiary bodies.  
3.9.  These include significant changes to assist delegates, measures to improve the planning and 
organization of meetings, the procedures for the conduct of formal and informal meetings and the 
introduction of digital tools to improve produc tivity and exchange of information.  
3.10.   I also note that important efforts have been undertaken in other WTO Councils and 
Committees. Following Members' request, the General Council continues to monitor progress and 
coordinate with WTO Bodies as "reform -by-doing" work advances. In this regard, in addition to the 
reports by respective Chairpersons of WTO Bodies, I asked the Secretariat to continue updating the 
report in JOB/GC/359  at every regular session of the General Council at least until MC13. An update 
of the report was circulated prior to the Senior Officials' meeting, and the most recent revision was 
circulated as JOB/GC/359/Rev.2  on 11 December.  
 
2 The Chairperson's  statement w as subsequently circulated in document JOB/GC/376 . WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 8 - 
 
  3.11.   As we inch closer to MC13, WTO reform has become an important element of our preparations 
to ensure a successful Ministerial Conference in Abu Dhabi. In this regard, as you have heard from 
my report on Tu esday at the TNC, Members are currently working on a section on WTO reform for 
a possible MC13 outcome document.  
3.12.   This comprises (i) a reaffirmation of Ministers' WTO reform commitment at MC12, (ii) a 
general acknowledgement of the progress of WTO reform w ork since Ministers last met, 
(iii) welcoming and taking note of reform -by-doing efforts, a paragraph on DS reform – which would 
depend on the ongoing process, (iv) acknowledging the reform retreats, and (v) recognizing the 
need for all Members to deepen d ialogue in a more focused manner to improve understanding on 
issues.  
3.13.   I recognize that, at MC13, the General Council and its subsidiary bodies are tasked to report 
on progress on WTO reform work. Given the numerous discussions and the amount of work we have  
accomplished thus far, I encourage all Members to continue participating in WTO reform work in this 
spirit. Let us together seize available opportunities, address the challenges faced by the WTO, and 
ensure the Organization's proper functioning – through WTO Reform.  
(ii) Paragraph 24 of the Ministerial Declaration on the WTO Response to the COVID -19 
Pandemic and Preparedness for Future Pandemics  (G/L/1521 ) 
3.14.   The Chairperson  noted that p ursuant to paragraph 24 of the Ministerial Declaration on the 
WTO Response to t he COVID -19 Pandemic and Preparedness for Future Pandemics ( WT/L/1142 ), 
"A stocktaking exercise will be taken of the work by WTO bodies under this declaration yearly at the 
General Council until the end of 2024, based on the reports of those relevant bodies."  She recall ed 
that this annual stocktaking exercise had been  undertaken at the July General Council meeting.  
3.15.   She said that work in this area ha d continued, as had been reported to her  in the meeting 
with Chairpersons of regular WTO bodies earlier in the week.  The Goods and Services Councils ha d 
adopted reports contained in G/L/1521  and S/C/66 . The TRIPS Council ha d continued its discussions 
under an agenda item named "IP and COVID -19". Also under this item, M embers had continued 
their practice of sharing experiences on domestic COVID -related IP measures taken during the 
pandemic on the basis of a Secretariat compilation of such measures that was updated and 
maintained on the WTO  website.  
(iii) Paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement – Duration of 
extended deadline3 
3.16.   In moving to sub -item (iii) "Paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement 
– Duration of Extended Deadline ", the Chairperson  noted that a t MC12, Ministers had decided that 
"No later than six months from the date of this Decision, Members will decide on its extension to 
cover the production and supply of COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics."  She then recalled that 
at the March General Council meeting, a commo n understanding had emerged - namely: the issue 
of the duration of the deadline will remain on the General Council agenda; that Members will provide 
an update on where they stand on their internal processes; and that substantive discussions will 
continue i n the TRIPS Council. It was her understanding that Members ha d continued their 
discussions on the substance of paragraph  8 of the TRIPS Decision in the TRIPS Council, and that 
Ambassador Pimchanok P itfield  (Thailand), Chairperson of the Council for TRIPS, would provide an 
update on these discussions.  
3.17.   Ambassador Pimchanok P itfield  (Thailand), Chairperson of the Council for TRIPS , delivered 
the following statement:  
3.18.   I would like to take this opportunity, as Chair of the Council for TRIPS, to provide a brief 
status report under my own responsibility on the state of play of discussions under paragraph  8 of 
the MC12 Decision – on whether to extend the scope of the Decision to COVID -19 diagnostics and 
therapeutics.  
 
3 WT/L/1141  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 9 - 
 
  3.19.   Since July, discussions on para graph  8 of the TRIPS Decision have continued at an informal 
Council meeting on 9 October, at the formal Council meeting on 30 -31 October, at informal 
consultations I held on 6 -9 November, and again at an informal Council meeting on 29 November 
2023. To further broaden the basis for fact - and evidence -based discussions, the Council also held 
a "Thematic Session for External Stakeholder Input" on 28 September 2023, where more than 20 
representatives from data analysts, international organizations, civil society, b usiness and academia 
shared facts, evidence and experiences relevant to the Council's discussions on this issue. The 
interventions at this thematic session reflected a broad spectrum of views and provided additional 
detail and analysis on certain elements of this long -running debate. My report on the thematic 
session has been circulated in document IP/C/W/706 . WTO Members were also briefed on the 
"Report on COVID -19 therapeutics and diagnostics and TRIPS flexibilities" by the US International 
Trade Commission  on 19 October 2023.  
3.20.   Despite this continued and focused engagement on this issue there is currently no consensus 
among Members on whether to extend the Decision to COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics. In 
my meetings and consultations, Members have large ly reiterated their known and diverging 
positions. A number of Members consider extension long overdue, and are calling for a binary "yes -
or-no decision" on this question at this General Council meeting based on the proposed decision text 
in document IP/C/W/694/Rev.1 . Other Members consider that there is no basis for an extension as 
they see no evidence of IP -related barriers to such products and consider that the pandemic is 
largely over. Some have suggested that, as consensus on extension is unl ikely, Members should 
agree on a forward -looking work programme on pandemic preparedness so as to continue the 
discussion on IP in a broader WTO context.  In light of these diverging views and suggestions, I stand 
ready to continue facilitating Members' eng agement on this question as appropriate. This concludes 
my status report on the work under paragraph 8.  
3.21.   While I have the floor, let me also briefly report on the TRIPS Council's discussions on TRIPS 
non-violation and situation complaints.  
3.22.   As you know, the  MC12 Decision on this issue instructs the Council for TRIPS to continue its 
examination of the scope and modalities for such complaints under the TRIPS Agreement, and to 
make recommendations to MC13. Members agreed that, in the meantime, such complaints w ould 
not be initiated under the TRIPS Agreement.  Despite my encouragement in the course of my 
consultations on this issue in November, and the continued discussion at the informal Council 
meeting in November, a number of Members are not ready to agree on a  recommendation on TRIPS 
non-violation complaints at this stage. On 29 November, I circulated a draft decision as a basis for 
consideration for Members, in the event that they might wish to recommend to the Ministerial 
Conference to once again extend the m oratorium on such complaints under the TRIPS Agreement. 
This draft has been circulated in JOB/IP/72 and is closely based on the text of previous such 
decisions.  
3.23.   Both these items – paragraph 8 of the TRIPS Decision and non -violation complaints – remain 
open on  the TRIPS Council 's agenda, so that the Council meeting can be resumed if Members are 
ready to agree on a conclusion to these issues.  
- Decision text on extension of the 17 June 2022 Ministerial Decision to 
COVID -19 Therapeutics and Diagnostics – Communication from South Africa 
(WT/GC/W/913  - IP/C/W/694/Rev .1) 
3.24.   The Chairperson  invited the delegation of  South Africa to introduce the item and 
communication contained in WT/GC/W/913  – IP/C/W/694/Rev.1 . 
3.25.   The representative of South Africa , on behalf of the co -sponsors of IP/C/W/669/Rev.1 , 
delivered the following statement:  
3.26.   The WTO has exhibited glaring shortcomings in its inability to take timely, adequate measures 
to add ress the needs of developing countries. The arduous one -and-a-half years it took for the WTO 
to arrive at a narrowly focused decision solely on vaccines is emblematic of its failure. The final 
Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement, adopted on 17 June 2022, falls short of the 
comprehensive TRIPS waiver proposal championed by 65 developing countr y Members  and 
supported globally by health experts and members of the public.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 10 - 
 
  3.27.   Paragraph 8 of the Decision states, "No later than six months  […] Members will de cide on its 
extension to cover the production and supply of COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics". This 
paragraph was a major concession by cosponsors who, in good faith, agreed to allow Members the 
six months they requested to conduct internal consultati ons. One and a half years later, there is still 
no decision. The tactics employed by some Members to continually delay the adoption of a decision 
on the extension are unacceptable. At the TNC on Tuesday, one Ambassador aptly referred to a trust 
deficit pre vailing in the WTO. Certainly, reneging on the commitment in paragraph 8 has damaged 
trust.  The time for delays is over – decisive action is required.  
3.28.   The emergence of COVID -19 variants, characterized  by an increasing number of mutations, 
has been confirme d by scientists. The heightened risk is evident in the appearance of new variants, 
surges in infections, and declining immunity. The challenge of high prices and limited access persists 
in many developing countries. Despite representing only 16  per cent  of the global population, high -
income countries acquired more than 70  per cent  of therapeutic supplies. It is reported that the 
number of people with high -risk COVID -19 infections in developing countries exceeded the procured 
supply of paxlovid recommended b y the WHO by at least eight million courses in 2022. This shortfall 
left unmet at least 90  per cent  of the health need for the WHO -preferred treatment in developing 
countries. Cosponsors, WHO, and other experts have presented evidence on the insufficiency of 
initiatives such as voluntary licenses, tier -pricing and access schemes of international organizations  
in facilitating prompt access to COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics in developing countries.  
Ample facts and evidence have been conveyed to Members  questioning the need to extend the 
waiver decision to therapeutics.  
3.29.   Allowing the extension of this waiver will lessen the burden of pandemics on health system s, 
and during pandemics on health and thus allowing to focus on economic development. Further, 
allowing the extension of this waiver to diagnostics and therapeutics would give us a fighting chance 
when there is a surge of variants in future. And this would cement the WTO's relevance in responding 
to the effects of the pandemic.  
3.30.   A pivotal aspect of th e 17 June Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement is the waiver of 
Article 31(f). Removing this legal hurdle for COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics holds the 
potential to achieve economies of scale, reduce prices and supply developing countries lack ing 
sufficient manufacturing capacity. Other aspects of the Decision that reaffirm existing flexibilities are 
equally important.  
3.31.   Given this background and paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision, the co -sponsors call on 
the General Council to immediately extend the 17 June TRIPS Decision adopted by the Ministers by 
consensus after long protracted negotiations, mutatis mutandis , to therapeutics and diagnostics as 
proposed in document WT/GC/W/913 . This extension presents WTO Members with a timely 
opportunity  to demonstrate their ability to respond swiftly to the ongoing global public health 
challenge marked by inequitable access.  
3.32.   Failure to adopt this Decision at the General Council would force Members to avoid multilateral 
approaches in favour of unilateral  measures. Such an unfortunate outcome would fragment the IP 
system. It would also underscore the WTO's emphatic incapacity to deliver multilateral outcomes of 
interest to developing countries. Such a message would not bode well for confidence building tow ards 
MC13.   
3.33.   Post-script , failure to extend the decision on TRIPS is 'not only a failure of reason, but also a 
moral failure, and an unnecessary stain on the history of this Organization'.  
3.34.   The Chairperson  added an additional point from her preparatory meeting with the 
Chairpersons of regular bodies. On the food security work programme, the discussions in the 
Committee on Agriculture had taken  place within the overall thematic parameters approved by the 
Committee in November2022 in a dedicated Working Group. The Working Group had been  given one 
year (i.e., until the end of November 2023) to conclude the work. Sinc e its establishment, the 
Working Group had engaged in substantive discussions, covering various themes such as border 
measures, encompassing both import and export restrictions, financing matters, production 
resilience, and fostering collaboration with int ernational organizations.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 11 - 
 
  3.35.   Approaching its conclusion in November, the Working Group had deliberated on a draft revised 
report and recommendations prepared by the coordinator, contained in RD/AG/120/Rev.2 . There 
had been  a broad convergence in the W orking Group to accept the report as a compromise and 
transmit it to the Committee for approval. However, one Member had maintained some concerns, 
deeming the report lacking ambition in certain respects. Similarly, other Members had resisted 
substantive ch anges to the report, citing reasons of overall balance contained in the current draft.  
3.36.   Considering the dynamics in Members' positions, both at the last meeting of the Working 
Group on 20 November and the formal meeting of the Committee on 27 -29 November, t he 
Chairperson had informed the Committee of his readiness to convene a special meeting for finalizing 
the report and recommendations of the work programme if consensus were to emerge in the coming 
days. There had been  no consensus for the further continua tion of the Working Group beyond end  
of November 2023.  
3.37.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
3.38.   At the outset we wish to associate ourselves with the statement delivered on behalf of the 
65 cosponsors  of IP/C/W/669/Rev.1 . Paragraph 8 of the MC12 Ministerial Decision on the 
TRIPS  Agreement regarding the extension of the decision to cover the production and supply of 
COVID -19 therapeutics and diagnostics is unambiguous. Regrettably, we have not been able to 
deliver on this is sue that would better equip developing countries to respond to current and future 
pandemic s. While non -proponent s continue to maintain that voluntary licenses are sufficient to 
address developing countries concerns, we are of the view that though voluntary  licenses are 
pertinent and useful public health tools, they are not adequate in addressing all issues of public 
health, during global health emergencies.  
3.39.   The African Group, at the TRIPS Council , has cited enough examples that highlight the several 
issues with the voluntary license mechanism including that the actual utility of some of the licenses 
is a concern for many African countries. Therefore, with respect to the draft G eneral Council  Decision 
regarding the issue of extension of paragraph 8 of the MC1 2 Decision on the TRIPS Agreement, 
we are of the view that this General Council should finalize this issue, and we call on Members to 
decide on the extension of paragraph 8 of the MC12 decision to therapeutics and diagnostics.  
3.40.   The representative of Djibout i, on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
3.41.   With regard to item 3.A(i), t he LDC Group is on record supporting improvements to the 
functioning of the WTO bodies, particularly those that had a genesis in the LDC Group submission in 
April 2022.  Those include use of annotated agendas, expediting the production of minutes, 
mechanisms to avoid overlapping of key meetings, summary notes the same day of meetings, and 
translation provided for all informal meetings.   
3.42.   To complement the work done,  we suggest that some improvements in the process of the 
reform could be considered. For example, future proposals requiring adoption and of a crosscutting 
nature with impact on LDC participation in WTO bodies, should be sent to the General Council for 
discussion and decision. LDCs and small delegations are all at the General Council.  
3.43.   Some recent adoptions, for example the change of the 10 -days rule to 15 days, (in the CTG, 
CMA, CTS), some of our Members thought that the change meant more time to prepare.  We did not 
reverse these adoptions not to stand in the way and change anything.  However, we request the 
General Council to agree that the change in those bodies can be implemented on a trial basis.  This 
is similar to what was already agreed in some of the b odies where it was agreed to apply the 
e-agenda on a trial basis  – a good idea that came from the reform by doing process.  We can also 
test the impact on the LDC Group and LDCs.  Finally, while useful in some cases, the "written 
procedure " and circulating proposals for adoption during summer recess should be avoided.  We 
reiterate our applause to the Secretariat, and the Chair person s for all of the great work done on 
several areas o f reform of the functioning of the various committees and councils.  
3.44.   With regard to item 3.A(ii), t he LDC Group thanks you for your statement on paragraph 24 of 
the Ministerial Declaration on the WTO Response to the COVID -19 Pandemic and Preparedness for 
Future Pandemics.  We have some comments on th e report contained in document G/L/1521  on the 
WTO response to the COVID -19 pandemic and preparedness for future pandemics. We note that in WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 12 - 
 
  addition to the Council for Trade in Goods, almost all of it s 14 subsidiary bodies have undertaken at 
least one activity to implement paragraph 24 of said Declaration. The work carried out has taught 
us several lessons relating to what each actor should adopt, at the national and/or international 
level, in times of  crisis. With this in mind, we welcome the concrete results that the Committee on 
Market Access (CMA) has agreed.  We urge other bodies to follow the example of the Market Access 
Committee in order to also achieve concrete results in their respective areas.  Furthermore, we want 
to reiterate our call to net food exporting Members to refrain from applying export restrictions to 
LDCs and NFIDCs importing critical products for their domestic health and protection needs.  
3.45.   We have noted the importance of digitaliz ation for the global economy during the COVID -19 
pandemic. We reiterate that the WTO has an important role to play in working with relevant 
international organizations to help LDCs bridge the digital divide in order to strengthen the resilience 
of their ec onomies and initiate their structural transformation.  Finally, as part of the update of the 
WTO website to reflect actions taken in the context of the implementation of paragraph 24 of the 
Ministerial Declaration on the WTO response to the COVID -19 pandemi c and preparedness for future 
pandemics, we urge the WTO Secretariat to add at least one link relating to the impact of this 
pandemic in LDCs.  
3.46.   On item 3.A(iii), t he LDC Group thanks South Africa for presenting the document.  The 
LDC Group is a co -sponsor of  the initiative leading to the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS 
Agreement Waiver on COVID -19 Vaccine during MC12.  Our Group calls on Members to continue to 
engage constructively in order to find consensus by the MC13 to include therapeutic and diagnostic 
products in said Ministerial Decision.  We must learn from our failures, and the same mistakes and 
procrastination should  not be repeated during a pandemic in future. For any global crisis, the LDCs 
are the worst victims. In this regard, the LDC Group requests to make a favourable decision to 
extend the MC12 decision on the TRIPS Waiver to cover therapeutic s and diagnostic s. 
3.47.   The representative of Guyana , on behalf of CARICOM , delivered the following statement:  
3.48.   We note the update on the detailed overview of the work carried out by councils, committees 
and negotiating bodies with respect to reform by doing.  Paragraph 3 of the MC12 Outcome Document 
commits us to work towards necessary reform of the WTO in a manner which is Member -driven, 
open, transparent and inclusive. While we especially commend the work being carried out by the 
Council for Trade in Goods and its subsidiary bo dies, we  note that many developing Members with 
capacity constrained delegations, including CARICOM Members, have not been able to actively 
participate in much of this reform work. We view many of the improvements being introduced to be 
useful. However, we  need to strike the right balance in terms of ensuring that there is a sufficient 
level of inclusivity in this work. We also have to ensure that some reforms which are meant to bring 
about improvements, do not have the unintended effect of imposing additio nal burdens on 
developing countries and LDCs. In this regard, it is important to retain the reporting arrangements 
to the General Council and we trust that Members will maintain a sufficient level of flexibility to allow 
a developing Member to comment on o r propose any amendment to a particular reform measure.  
3.49.   With respect to TRIPS and Public Health, the CARICOM Group thanks South Africa and the 
co-sponsors for their submission and calls for meaningful, constructive, and fair negotiations on 
Paragraph 8 of the MC12 Decision on the TRIPS Agreement, that would allow for a balanced approach 
between intellectual property and public health concerns.  The CARICOM Group recogn izes that the 
issue has been discussed both in the formal and informal working groups of th e TRIPS Council and 
the SOM this year , yet there has been limited progress. We note that this issue remains important 
as a decision on Paragraph 8 will provide more legal certainty for Governments and legitimate policy 
space to adequately respond to health  emergencies, and we wish to urge necessary and requisite 
action.  
3.50.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
3.51.   In October  2022, following MC12, the Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Goods consulte d 
bilaterally with WTO Members on how they wished to implement the different outcomes of MC12, 
including on the WTO  response to the pandemic.  The African Group notes your statement and 
welcomes the report, which provides information on the work undertaken by the CTG and its WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 13 - 
 
  14 subsidiary bodies between the years 2020 and 2023 concerning their response to the 
COVID -19 pandemic and preparedness for future pandemics.  
3.52.   The African Group shares the trade concerns raised regarding measures introduced in 
response to, or in connection with, the COVID -19 pandemic. The bodies considering these concerns 
included the Council for Trade in Goods and the Committee on Market Access, both of which 
considered the same trade concern relating to an export licensing req uirement for 
COVID -19 vaccines, and the SPS and TBT  Committees.  
3.53.   The African Group takes note of Members' proposals in this report to establish or reinforce 
conformity assessment procedures, as well procedures for interagency coordination mechanisms, 
which  can improve dialogue with non -state actors to inform the policymaking response at each stage 
and, thus, control the spread of COVID -19.  
3.54.   The representative of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines , on behalf of the OECS , delivered the 
following statement:  
3.55.   We align with the statements on behalf of the CARICOM and ACP Groups. Thank you for your 
reports on the work being done with respect to the reforms focused on the deliberative function and 
institutional matters. It is clear that a significant amount of work ha s gone into improving the 
functioning of the Council for Trade in Goods and its subsidiary bodies . Much of this is commendable 
and important work and perhaps to the extent possible, rather than starting at ground zero, other 
committees and subsidiary bodie s can borrow from and build on this important body of work.  
3.56.   The CTG oversees the functioning of 14 subsidiary bodies and as a very small delegation, 
unfortunately, we lack the capacity to engage meaningfully in the work of the majority of these 
bodies, es pecially in a context where the negotiating agenda of the WTO remains very active. 
Therefore, these reports to the General Council take on added significance.  
3.57.   We wish to make a caution and a suggestion. We caution against the introduction of reforms 
or improvements which on the surface, may appear to be making a qualitative difference, but which 
in actuality, impacts negatively on Members with small delegations. Here, we mention the change 
in the number of days before an agenda is closed. On one hand, it d oes objectively allow for Members 
to have better sight of an agenda which could go a far way in aiding preparations for a meeting, 
including consultations with capitals and stakeholders. However, on the other hand, it also reduces 
the time that a capacity constrained delegation has to introduce an item on an agenda. This leads 
to our suggestion, which is that these reforms should be reviewed periodically so as to assess their 
impacts and where necessary, make appropriate modifications.  
3.58.   Regarding the extens ion of the COVID -19 Waiver to Therapeutics and Diagnostics, we are 
broadly supportive of the call by Members to extend the waiver to cover these products. We therefore 
thank South Africa for its communication.  
3.59.   Referring to item 3.A(iv), o n the e -commerce i ssues, we thank all proponents for their 
proposals. We are broadly supportive of the renewal of the Work Programme and the extension of 
the Moratorium on Customs Duties on Electronic Transmissions. The Work Programme must reflect 
a clear development dimens ion. It is also important for there to be ongoing discussions on the 
definition, scope and impact of the Moratorium. We take note of the recently submitted ACP proposal 
in document WT/GC/W/ 916. We believe that the ACP Draft Decision on the Work Programme an d 
Moratorium could serve as a useful bridge around which to structure our conversations.  
3.60.   The representative of Samoa , on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following statement:  
3.61.   The ACP Group welcomes the work on the functioning of the WTO Bodies. We h ave said in 
previous General Council meetings that we need Ministers to affirm the principles behind all work on 
WTO Reform including reform of the functioning of committees.  Proposals requiring adoption must 
as much as possible be implemented on a trial b asis to track the impact on small delegations and 
LDCs must be well debated on all angles of the proposal.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 14 - 
 
  3.62.   Given the capacity constraints for our delegations to attend all of the subsidiary bodies  and 
councils, those issues requiring adoption should be pre sented at the General Council where all 
delegations attend. The implications, if any, for those changes should be identified and addressed.  
3.63.   The ACP Group continues to support the extension of the paragraph 8 period. The ACP Group 
also supports expeditious resolution of the matter on the inclusion of diagnostics and therapeutics 
to the MC12 TRIPS Waiver, as part of the outcomes for MC13.  
3.64.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
3.65.   Thank you first for your thanks for our contri bution to the fish fund, and ratification of the 
agreement. On reform, let me welcome the efforts of the Secretariat and all the efforts that we, the 
Members have put into institutional reform. As you know, the UK (and 55 Members) presented a 
paper to this  Committee on this very important issue. We talk about showing progress, since MC12, 
we can be proud of the work we have done as an organization , and it shows how much we can 
achieve if we just get on with it.  Look at the work of the CTG, just one example,  120 reforms across 
that Committee. At the heart of that, ensuring that we build trust, and that we ensure even the very 
smallest delegation here can engage in our work in a way that is constructive.  
3.66.   On the pandemic response and TRIPS, we have done some really important work on the 
pandemic response, following on the statement from MC12, which obviously needs to continue.  On 
TRIPS it is clear, that the reality, despite all the discussions we have had, there is no consensus 
amongst Members on whether or not the extension on therapeutics and diagnostics is genuinely 
required. It is also true that the MC12 decision, which we spent so much time elaborating, has not 
been used. We need to think carefully about the value of extending something that does not appear 
to help all that much as we had hoped on the ground. So, without understanding the consequences 
of extending that decision we risk compromising the very international IP system that we have 
worked so effectively to develop, and has been, in our view , been so useful to us in that pandemic 
response.  
3.67.   In our view, we need to build on the TRIPS Agreement to build on the way it works, not 
undermine it and we need to broaden the conversation on the longer -term initiative to increase 
access to medicines as we are hoping to achieve, with our paper on voluntary licensing and 
technology transfers. We recognize  that voluntary licences  are not a silver bullet, as is clear in the 
Annexes to our papers, but there are clear examples of their successful use. We are really pleased 
with the response to the paper, and we want to thank each and every Members who has engaged 
with us on it and we  want to encourage all of us to share to our experiences and we look forward to 
further engagement in this area in the New Year.  
3.68.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
3.69.   There is still a lot of work to do in this final s tretch ahead of MC13. We all need to show 
flexibility and willingness to reach landing zones if we want MC13 to be the first truly "reform 
ministerial."  The European Union welcomes the processes that are ongoing on the different issues, 
including the work on reform by doing.  We need to find workable solutions to key negotiations for 
MC13, such as dispute settlement reform, agriculture, and fisheries subsidies. We also need to 
identify a way forward on the issue of the e -commerce moratorium and work programm e. We also 
need to agree on how the WTO can work post -MC13 on key issues for the multilateral trading system.  
3.70.   On the WTO's response to the COVID -19 pandemic, the European Union welcomes the work 
undertaken in the subsidiary bodies of the CTG on experience -sharing relating to the trade 
challenges that emerged from the COVID -19 pandemic.  We believe that this type of technical work 
was not only useful to help identify solutions and best practices during the pandemic itself but can 
serve as a model for future p andemics and similar trade -disruptive events.  We especially welcome 
the outcome document agreed upon in the Committee on Market Access, which attempts to draw 
conclusions and provides a useful summary of the work done. We welcome that the report endorses 
and highlights these conclusions.  On TRIPS, while the European Union is ready to engage in the 
discussions on whether to extend the scope of the Ministerial Decision to COVID -19 therapeutics and 
diagnostics, we note that little progress has been made in thi s complex discussion and the positions 
of Members remain far apart.  It is clear to us that there is no consensus on this issue among the WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 15 - 
 
  Members.  The European Union remains ready to engage constructively and therefore considers that 
the discussion should c ontinue in order to find a consensual solution.  
3.71.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
3.72.   Bangladesh aligns with the statement delivered by Djibouti on behalf of the LDC Group. We 
thank you  for your report and for the state of pla y report on WTO reform contained in the document 
JOB/GC/359/Rev.2  regarding the work improvement in WTO councils and committees . We welcome 
the improvements. The core objective of WTO institutional reform is to improve its work and not to 
create new difficulties. Moreover, any reform must not lead to an alteration of the multilateral and 
Member -driven character of the WTO. All reform proposals and their finalization must be 
consolidated in the General Council .  
3.73.   In the Senior Officials' Meeting in October , senior officials from Bangladesh and majority of 
Members strongly expressed support for a two -tier DS system. The senior officials also reiterated 
the need to bring the so -called delegate -led informal discussions as soon as possible und er a relevant 
WTO body. It is a pity that despite clear instructions by the Ministers in MC12 outcome document 
paragraph 4, till date no WTO body has initiated any discussion on DS reform. Members can 
legitimately provide suggestions or express concerns on ly through a relevant WTO body. Therefore, 
it's urgent to bring the DS reform discussion under a relevant WTO body, respecting the agreed and 
established procedures of decision making in WTO.  
3.74.   In conclusion, w e urge Members to favourably consider the LDC G roup's submission  
JOB/GC/2 23/Rev.1 . This is vital that, as LDCs, our voices must be heard in any reform discussion 
and accommodated in the decision -making process.  
3.75.   Regarding paragraph 8 of the Ministerial decision on TRIPS Waiver, Bangladesh alig ns with 
the statement delivered by South Africa on behalf of the Cosponsors of IP/C/W/ 669/Rev.1  and the 
statement delivered by Djibouti on behalf of the LDC Group. We are disappointed that Members 
could not agree within the deadline to follow the  good gesture of the Ministers. Enough facts and 
evidence were provided by the co -sponsors. Future pandemic is a threat. We must learn from our 
failures as WTO could not address the supply constraints of necessary COVID -19 vaccines, 
medicines, and diagnost ics in a timely manner. The same mistakes and procrastination should not 
be repeated in future. Bangladesh supports that the MC12 decision on TRIPS Waiver should be 
extended to cover therapeutics and diagnostic, as soon as possible, as proposed in the draf t decision 
WT/GC/W/913 , as presented by South Africa on behalf of the co -sponsors.  
3.76.   The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
3.77.   On item 3 .A(i) related to WTO reform, having a fully functioning  dispute settlement system is 
Malaysia's to p reform priority. As we reiterated in numerous occasions, a fully functioning of the 
two-tier dispute settlement system is fundamental to this Organization and must remain as the 
central pillar of this institution.  In this regard, Malaysia is glad to enga ge in the ongoing process, 
and we welcome the informal discussions on the dispute settlement reform, with a view to restore 
and making the dispute settlement system operational again. However, we wish to highlight that 
participation in these discussions is  not without its challenges to small delegations, like Malaysia.  In 
order to safeguard the interests of all Members, with a particular emphasis on developing and least -
developed countries, it is imperative that this process is carried out in a manner that embodies 
inclusivity and transparency.  
3.78.   Malaysia subscribes to the spirit of 'reform by doing' and we believe these reform initiatives 
should be treated as an ongoing process, and should not be rushed – but, area of priorities need to 
be identified with an aim to address current challenges and uncertainties.  
3.79.   With regard to item 3 .A(iii) on extending the TRIPS Decision to COVID -19 diagnostics and 
therapeutics, Malaysia acknowledges the importance of adopting an evidence -based approach to 
illustrate that inte llectual property rights do not obstruct access or supply of these products. Hence, 
Malaysia is of the view that some related reports , including by the USITC are crucial to support the 
ongoing discussion at the WTO.  The COVID -19 pandemic has highlighted the critical need for 
equitable access to affordable diagnostics and therapeutics globally. Hence, Malaysia hopes that a 
consensus that strikes a balance between public health needs and concerns related to intellectual  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 16 - 
 
  property rights, can be reached at MC13 by fostering constructive dialogue and intensifying 
evidence -based engagement.  
3.80.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
3.81.   On reform by doing, I commend the Council for Trade in Goods for its e xcellent work, as 
evidenced by the report in document G/L/1523 , which records a total of 127 improvements in the 
functioning of the CTG and its subsidiary bodies. We recall that the CTG and its 14 subsidiary bodies 
constitute the majority of the WTO's regular bod ies. These improvements, requested and pursued 
by Members to ensure better, more effective participation, therefore constitute significant work. The 
effective functioning of the regular bodies is necessary to continue and improve the monitoring and 
impleme ntation function of the Agreements in force and their successful application.  
3.82.   My delegation, together with other Latin American delegations, has been working tirelessly to 
boost the participation of small delegations in regular meetings, and we are please d to see that 
many of the improvements suggested in document JOB/CTG/21  have already been or are being 
implemented. We would also like to thank the delegations of the United Kingdom and India for their 
specific contributions to these processes, and the const ructive spirit with which all Members have 
participated, enabling the progress made to be implemented.  
3.83.   Improving the functioning of the regular bodies is an incremental and ongoing process, and 
we would like to see similar progress in the implementation o f improvements in other Councils and 
Committees, including this Council, which could start with a better scheduling procedure so as not 
to negatively impact the schedules of delegations or other bodies of this Organization. We believe 
that the CTG has adop ted exemplary improvements, and we would like to call on all WTO Councils 
to assess the best practices adopted by the CTG, with a view to replicating and adopting them, 
where feasible. The Committee on Trade and Environment is also working on some improvem ents 
and held its first thematic session this year within the framework of the "reform by doing". Regarding 
formal procedural improvements, my delegation has already submitted specific proposals, which, as 
agreed, will continue to be analyzed with a view t o their implementation under the Chair's excellent 
stewardship. We commend him for his leadership in advancing this issue.  
3.84.   I express my appreciation for the exemplary leadership of the CBFA Chair  and DDG Ellard in 
seeking a compromise -based solution for th e WTO budget alongside Members. We appreciate, in 
particular, the commitment shown in meeting the information technology requirements for the 
successful implementation of the digital solutions under the "reform by doing", an initiative of which 
Paraguay is  a proponent alongside other developing Members.  
3.85.   On paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement, I express my thanks to 
the TRIPS Council Chair for her report and to the delegation of South Africa for its proposal. Paraguay 
wishes to exp ress its support for document WT/GC/ W/913 , which proposes to extend the waiver to 
COVID -19 therapeutics and diagnostics. For countries like Paraguay, i.e., net importers of medical 
products and equipment with a limited capacity for local production, it is crucial to have a proper 
international supply chain. This includes COVID -19 vaccines, medicines, medical equipment, 
materials and diagnostic methods. It is essential that markets remain open without unnecessary 
distortions and that there be greater transpa rency regarding prices and conditions. We also support 
the strengthening of trade facilitation measures for such products with a view to reducing the 
restrictions imposed by producer Members, as the most vulnerable suffer most. I would like to stress 
that this is not simply a trade issue but also has a direct impact on our citizens' health. Paraguay 
therefore wishes to reaffirm its commitment to the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement 
adopted at MC12 and support the extension to therapeutics and dia gnostics. We urge Members to 
reach a consensus on this issue as soon as possible.  
3.86.   The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
3.87.   Egypt aligns itself with the statement presented by the distinguished delegation of South 
Africa on behalf of t he co -sponsors, as well as the contributions made by other proponents of 
document  WT/GC/W/913 . We endorse the extension of the TRIPS waiver decision to cover 
therapeutics and diagnostics.  Let us reflect on the genesis of this proposal. More than three year s 
ago, the co -sponsors submitted the original TRIPS waiver proposal in document IP/C/W/ 669/Rev.1. WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 17 - 
 
  Regrettably, the negotiations culminated in a Ministerial Decision that, while affirming the existing 
flexibility within the TRIPS Agreement, provided only a limited waiver for exportation.  
3.88.   Despite this historical backdrop, we find ourselves engaged in ong oing discussions regarding 
the extension of the Ministerial decision to cover therapeutics and diagnostics, as stipulated in 
paragraph 8 of the TRIPS Agreement decision. Egypt recalls the constructive way we responded to 
queries from non -proponents, provid ing ample evidence supporting our plea for a comprehensive 
approach to address the pandemic challenge. Notably, we accommodated requests to extend the 
mandate in paragraph 8  to facilitate internal discussions among non -proponents.  
3.89.   Regrettably, we have observed a delay in responding to our call for the extension of the 
Ministerial decision. Moreover, there have been attempts to defer discussions on this matter by 
introducing a last -minute submission on an unrelated technical issue, thereby confounding th e 
explicit yes -or-no mandate.  
3.90.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
3.91.   The Russian Federation welcomes and supports the efforts of the WTO Secretariat as well as 
the WTO Members , including within the CTG to improve th e work of the WTO and increase its 
effectiveness. By taking careful and minimal steps, we have already been advancing in the right 
direction, but certain "big steps" are also necessary. By this I mean the restoration of the 
dysfunctional dispute settlement  system. And thank you, Madame Chair , for making accent on this 
issue in your statement as well. I hope that in the near future we will be able to come to a full 
consensus on the WTO reform and launch all its elements in full force.  
3.92.   The Russian Federation is grateful to the WTO Secretariat for drafting report stocktaking 
activities in goods area as well as highlighting lessons learned during COVID -19 pandemic. The 
report will serve a good basis for preparedness for future pandemics. We also note that Russia 's 
communication "Shaping MC13 Outcomes" circulated in JOB/GC/375  intersects with the report 
prepared by the Secretariat. Specifically, one of the communication's section is devoted to response 
to the COVID -19 pandemic and preparedness for future pandemics , outlining some of the thoughts 
in this area , including on the suggested wording of the MC13 outcome document. We invite all 
delegations to get acquainted with our communication.  
3.93.   The representative of Ecuador  delivered the following statement:  
3.94.   I will addres s agenda items 3. A(i) and 3. A(ii). First, my delegation would like to thank you for 
your reports on "reform by doing" and the WTO response to the pandemic.  Ecuador believes that 
the report on reform ought to have included the work of the Committee on Trade  and Environment 
on "reform by doing". I would like to highlight a significant milestone in this regard. The Committee 
has launched the Organization of thematic sessions on a trial basis; the first thematic session focused 
on trade contributions to energy transition efforts concerning climate change adaptation and 
mitigation. This session was held on 13 November. Members have had a positive view since the first 
meeting and have evaluated their results with a view to adjusting the future working methodology.   
We hope to hold two additional thematic sessions next year.  
3.95.   Regarding "reform by doing", we welcome the fact that, in the Goods Council and its subsidiary 
bodies, 127 measures have been implemented that have contributed significantly to improving the 
work of delegations in Geneva and our capitals. We thank you for your report, Madam Chair, which 
includes these improvements.  This will have a positive impact on the deliberative function of the 
Organization. From our perspective, the harmonization of proced ures and the publication and 
distribution of information, as well as the e-Delegate s portal, among other measures, are of 
particular benefit to small delegations with limited human resources. We are all aware that this is 
not a simple task, and countless m eetings have been held this year making it possible to achieve 
these results. In this regard, Ecuador wishes to recognize the constructive participation of all 
delegations, particularly Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Peru, Paraguay and Uruguay, with whom my 
delegation has worked in a close and coordinated fashion.  
3.96.   In addition, I would like to highlight the work carried out in the context of the WTO response 
to the COVID -19 pandemic. Ecuador commits to working on this subject in order to have a document 
that reflects the lessons learned and that serves as a reference for critical situations in the future.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 18 - 
 
  3.97.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
3.98.   I will make a single intervention under agenda items 3.A ( i), (ii) and ( iii). Let me th ank all the 
Members for their meaningful engagement in conducting the work on the WTO reform as mandated 
in the MC12 outcome document.  On the deliberative function, we welcome the steps taken in the 
WTO councils and committees to improve their functioning.  The "reform by doing process" should 
continue along the same positive trend. This step -by-step approach is indeed useful in consolidating 
the WTO as a forum for international dialogue.  
3.99.   Future work should aim at making the WTO more inclusive and more respo nsive to current 
and future challenges. This includes launching a dedicated dialogue on trade -related global 
challenges: trade and industrial policy ; trade and environmental sustainability ; and inclusiveness at 
MC13.  WTO reform will be at the heart of MC13. It will be an opportunity to record progress beyond 
improving the deliberative function.  
3.100.   Having a fully functional dispute settlement system by 2024 remains of the highest priority 
for Switzerland. At MC13, we should do more than taking stock of the work done and progress 
achieved so far. To that end, it is important that all Members remain constructively engaged in the 
informal process.  
3.101.   On the negotiation function, let me recall the importance of the JSIs and their integration in 
the WTO framework. T hey contribute to strengthening the multilateral trading system and reaffirm 
the credibility of the WTO.  
3.102.   On the WTO response to the pandemic, we welcome the report by the CTG and its subsidiary 
bodies pursuant to paragraph 24 of the MC12 Ministerial Declar ation. The report highlights a number 
of lessons learned, including the need to enhance transparency of trade -related measures, the need 
to better coordinate between Members and with the private sector, and the need to improve data 
collection and informati on sharing.  These are areas where the WTO could carry on useful work in 
anticipation of future health crises.  
3.103.   Regarding item 3 .A(iii), let me thank the TRIPS Council Chair person  for her report.  My 
delegation takes note of communication WT/GC/W/913 . We reca ll that WHO declared last May the 
end of the COVID -19 pandemic as a health emergency.  More than a year ago Mexico and Switzerland 
submitted facts and figures in communication IP/C/W/693 , which demonstrate that COVID -19 
therapeutics and diagnostics are suffic iently available globally and that access is not blocked by IP. 
These trends have since been confirmed, including by the facts and data presented at the thematic 
session, that there is a surplus both in products and manufacturing capacity for COVID -19 vacc ines, 
therapeutics and diagnostics. Millions of COVID -19 vaccines doses, therapeutics and diagnostics 
have had to be destroyed since due to reaching expiry date. As just mentioned by the UK, the MC12 
TRIPS Decision on COVID -19 vaccines has not been used. A n extension of this Decision to 
therapeutics and diagnostics is not necessary nor useful and risks to be counterproductive.  In sum, 
there is no consensus among Members to take a decision on paragraph 8 extension, and the General 
Council should take note of  this. 
3.104.   This being said, a number of broader points were raised in the Council's discussion, such as 
the concern of how to stimulate geographically more diversified manufacturing of pandemic -related 
health products or questions in relation to the geographic al limitation of certain voluntary licenses 
granted in the context of the pandemic. My delegation is ready to continue a constructive, 
facts-based discussion on these and related matters.  
3.105.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
3.106.   China  highly commends the progress made so far on WTO reform. We agree that WTO reform 
should be reflected in the outcome document. For reform by doing, we are pleased to see work on 
improving the function of the WTO councils, committees and negotiating groups.   
3.107.   On pandemic response , we also want to highlight  the work done on implementing the 
MC12  mandate regarding the responding to pandemic. We welcome the report recently circulated 
by the Council for Trade in Goods , summarizing the work of its subsidiary commi ttees. We suggest  
that the Secretariat continue to summarize the good practices implemented by Members responding WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 19 - 
 
  to pandemic , with a view to formulate the guidelines of best practice through discussions among 
Members, so as to better prepare for similar challenges in the future.  
3.108.   On the TRIPS waiver, although the COVID -19 pandemic no longer constitutes a "public health 
emergency of international concern", developing Members still face great challenges in fighting 
against the pandemic and accessing COVID -19 diagnostic and therapeutic products. China calls on 
Members to take action in accordance with the MC12 ministerial mandate. China commits its full 
engagement. Finally, we encourage Members to continue efforts and find solution on paragraph 8 of 
the MC12 Ministerial Declaration related to food security.  
3.109.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
3.110.   We hope that the facts and the record contained in the report by our International Trade 
Commission will help inform conti nued thoughtful and constructive discussion in the TRIPS Council  
on this issue, which is, of course, of great importance and we want to thank the TRIPS Chair person  
for her efforts  in conducting consultations and conversation s. 
3.111.   I was  not going to intervene on the reform by doing, but I feel compelled. First of all, I do 
want to thank the Chair person  of the Council for Trade in Goods  and the subsidiary bodies for the 
great work in demonstrating , compiling and pushing to do reform  by doing and all the 100 and 
something actions that have been taken .  
3.112.   I have heard some praise today, but also some expressions of negativity about that process, 
and it seems like the answer is those conversations need to happen here at the General Council . I 
guess I do  not understand how that works because we come here and we read statements at each 
other that have been prepared  weeks before, and we do  not engage in a conversation. If there are 
issues with efforts that are lacking in terms of reform by doing, we need to enga ge with each other 
in a conversation and maybe we are able to do this at the General Council .  
3.113.   But it would really require reform on how we deal with each other  here or we  are just going 
to have a session that only deals with one issue and then have a back and forth. I mean we 
understand some of the concerns raised . I hope that they also recognize the improvements that 
have been made, many of which are being  made to promote inclusivity . If it is lacking, then let us  
have a conversation. But I am just re ally struggling to understand how bringing the conversation to 
the General Council  is the answer to that problem, and I am open to exploring with others how we 
do engage more thoughtfully with each other  because we do want to see a better way of dealing 
with each other, both here at the General Council  and in all the councils and committees . 
3.114.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
3.115.   We would like to appreciate you and the WTO Secretariat for the reform by doing work. We 
welcome the s tate of play report presented today and request the Secretariat to continue the 
approach of updating the report post -MC13.  We particularly found the tabulation of all pre - and 
post-MC12 submissions on this issue very useful to keep smaller delegations, lik e us, well -informed 
of the efforts undertaken in the respective WTO bodies. This would assist in ensuring that 
WTO reform is an open, transparent and inclusive process. A dedicated central repository on the 
WTO website is also a welcome alternative.  
3.116.   Now I would like to turn to the agenda on the implementation of paragraph 24 of the 
Ministerial Declaration on the WTO Response to the Covid -19 Pandemic and Preparedness for Future 
Pandemics. C OVID -19 pandemic impacted every facet of human, and vulnerable develo ping 
countries and LDCs are still reeling under the inflation and debt engendered partly by the global 
policies followed after C OVID -19. We believe that WTO's response future pandemics must facilitate 
the strengthening of the resilience of our economies an d our state of preparedness. To this end, we 
urge Member's attention to the submission made by Pakistan that calls for flexibilities for those 
vulnerable developing countries that face crisis situations including balance -of-payment issues, 
pandemics and na tural disasters.  
3.117.   It is disappointing that Members could not agree within the deadline to follow up on the good 
intentions of the Ministers or find an alternate solution such as how compulsion can be added to 
voluntary licensing scheme. We can neither ignor e the threat of future pandemics nor the necessity WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 20 - 
 
  of affordable and timely access to diagnostics and therapeutics. Pakistan aligns with the statement 
made by the distinguished Ambassador of South Africa , on behalf of the co -sponsors of 
IP/C/W/ 669/Rev.1 and urges the General Council to immediately extend the Decision adopted by 
the Ministers by consensus after long protracted negotiations at MC12, to therapeutics and 
diagnostics.  
3.118.   The representative of Sri Lanka  delivered the following statement:  
3.119.   Regarding reform by doing, my delegation takes note of the work carried out by various 
bodies. We may continue our work while keeping in mind that our reform process would not impose 
any additional burden to developing c ountries and LDCs.  
3.120.   Regarding item 3 .A(ii), my delegation noted the extensive work carrie d-out pursuant to the 
mandate of paragraph 24 of the Ministerial Declaration at MC12. We should continue to further 
engage on this subject with special focus on challen ges encountered by the developing countries 
and LDCs relating to crisis management.  
3.121.   Regarding paragraph 8 of the Ministerial decision on the TRIPS Agreement, my delegation 
wishes to thank South Africa and co -sponsors for the statement.  Sri Lanka also wishe s to align with 
many Members who proposed the extension of 17 June 2022 Ministerial Decision to COVID -19 
therapeutics and diagnostics.  As we know , markets failed to address the COVID -19 pandemic that 
had an impact on  the majority of the people on this eart h. The main reason was the constraints of 
supply side of the market. If we had a stronger  supply side , not only for vaccines , but also for 
therapeutic and diagnostics, we could have avoided many catastrophic situations in many developing 
countries and LDCs . Therefore, the extension is important not only for economic reasons of 
correcting the market forces, but also for moral reasons.  
3.122.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
3.123.   Brazil takes note of the work done by the TRIPS Council on pa ragraph 8 of the Ministerial 
decision on TRIPS Agreement and supports the extension of the waiver. Brazil underlines the 
importance of guaranteeing that intellectual property rights do not constitute barriers to access to 
medicines and diagnostics at affor dable prices, in particular in developing and least developed 
countries, as well as the need for striking the right balance between the TRIPS Agreement and Public 
Health demands.  
3.124.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
3.125.   Let me re spond to the agenda item 3 .A(i) and 3 .A(iii).  We appreciate your update on the 
state-of-play of WTO reform.  Like many others in this room, my delegation wants to see the WTO 
that is fit -for-purpose, fit -for-its time, and caters to the needs and interests o f its 
diverse  membership.  My delegation attaches great importance, among others, on measures to 
facilitate Members' effective participation in WTO bodies.  This includes allowing ample of preparatory 
time for Members to participate in the meeting. I welcome  progress in the right direction, for 
instance, in recent Committee on Agriculture Regular Session, whereas Members approved to 
advance the timelines for the release of the reminder airgram and the closure of agenda.  I also wish 
to underline the need to av oid scheduling conflicts, especially between meetings that attract great 
deal of interests from Members. A case in point is yesterday's session of the General Council that 
coincided with the Secretariat's logistical briefing for the MC13.  
3.126.   Moving to agenda item 3 .A(iii), Indonesia would like to align its statement with South Africa, 
on behalf of the IP/C/W/ 669/Rev.1  co-sponsors.  Despite evidence and facts showing that COVID -19 
is here to stay, it is inexplicable that we keep hearing a much louder cry for more "evidence" or 
"facts" to reach a decision on this issue.  Indeed, we cannot  apologize to the dead, particularly to the 
7 million people whose live tragically ended by COVID -19 – many of them are friends and families 
of ourselves.  However, we can rectify our past mistakes through immediately extending the 17 June 
TRIPS Decision ad opted by the Ministers by consensus after long protracted negotiations, mutatis 
mutandis to therapeutics and diagnostics, as requested by proponents in document WT/GC/W/913 . 
Our action, or inaction, will be judged by our future generations.  Therefore, it is  my hope that this 
organization is able to show that we care about protecting public's health and to be united for 
common good.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 21 - 
 
  3.127.   The Chairperson  replied that , as had been communicated a few days prior,  this General 
Council meeting had been convened half a d ay earlier than scheduled,  given the exceptionally long 
agenda .  
3.128.   The representative of the Plurinational State of Bolivia  delivered the following statement:  
3.129.   Regarding WTO reform, we take note of the discussions and appreciate the efforts made. 
We believe t hat for the process to be credible and fruitful, it must necessarily be Member -driven, 
provide tools that ensure the participation of all countries based on the principles of inclusiveness 
and transparency, and allow the Members of small delegations from d eveloping countries to 
participate fully in meetings.  
3.130.   Regarding paragraph 8 of the MC12 declaration, we endorse the statement made by the 
distinguished delegation of South Africa on behalf of the co -sponsors of document 
IP/C/W/ 669/Rev.1 . We regret that, more than one and a half years later, no concrete progress has 
been made in fulfilling the mandate adopted by Ministers at MC12 to extend the waiver decision to 
therapeutics and diagnostics, as indicated in paragraph 8 of the decision.  The hig h cost of essential 
medical supplies to combat COVID -19 became evident during the pandemic, and many countries 
face major challenges in accessing medicines and diagnostic tests, the procedures for which are 
costly, complex,  and lengthy. Several states  encourage the use of voluntary licensing, but Bolivia 
made a request in this regard,  and to date, we have heard nothing, which clearly shows how 
voluntary licensing does not offer an opportunity to provide the rapid response required in a health 
emergency.  
3.131.   Accordingly, we believe that it is crucial to continue the discussions to conclude the 
implementation of the decision. It is clear that the international community's response to the COVID -
19 pandemic was, for many populations worldwide, belated and limited. The pandemic and its effects 
remain latent, and one of the lessons learned is that to react to future pandemics, the limited access 
to vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics must be addressed. We must prioritize human life and 
those hit hardest by the adve rse effects of this and future pandemics.  
3.132.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
3.133.   On reform by doing , Korea  would like to appreciate the WTO Secretariat and respective 
Chairpersons of WTO bodies for updating "Reform -by-Doing" document. Special thanks to the  CTG 
for preparing a report on improvement in the functioning of CTG and its subsidiary bodies. Indeed, 
the work of CTG is the paragon for other working bodies. We hope this commendable outcome of 
improving daily fu nctions in various WTO bo dies will be duly recognized by Ministers at MC13, and 
the work continues beyond MC13.  
3.134.   On the extension of the TRIPS waiver, Korea would like to extend appreciation to the 
TRIPS  Council Chairperson and the Members for their constructive engagement in discussions.  
During the ongoing discussions, we have learned that there are various contrib uting factors beyond 
IP in ensuring equitable access to COVID -19 therapeutics and diagnostics. We also recognize the 
necessity to further explore broader approaches, such as voluntary licensing and technology 
transfer, including issues of geographical limi ts and sandwich countries. A consensus among 
Members has not been reached yet beyond the deadline. However, Korea believes this should not 
lead to the end of the discussion.  
3.135.   We acknowledge the critical nature of this discussion, given that some Members ar e still 
grappling with the COVID -19 pandemic, and, at the same time, we recognize that this will have 
implications for the innovation system as well as the response to future pandemics.  
3.136.   In this regard, we hope we could agree at MC13 on further exploring th e most effective ways 
to deal with pandemics more broadly, extending the discussion beyond compulsory licensing.  
3.137.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
3.138.   Reform by Doing is an important initiative to increase the inclusiveness and eff ectiveness of 
work at the WTO. We appreciate the efforts by the Secretariat , as well as Chairpersons of Councils WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 22 - 
 
  and Committees, particularly the initiative by the CTG Chairperson . Reform by Doing should continue 
and we continue to engage in the process.  
3.139.   On item 3.A(iii) , Japan appreciates the TRIPS Chair person  for her report and the co -sponsors 
for submitting a draft decision on this issue. Through the thematic session of the TRIPS Council and 
the reports by the USITC, Members have improved their understan ding of the facts including the 
supply -demand situation for COVID -19 diagnostics and therapeutics and their relationship with 
intellectual property. Based on the new knowledge of these facts and evidence, the TRIPS Council 
would certainly be able to constr uctively promote substantive discussions.  We expect as summarized 
in the previous meetings of the General Council ; substantive discussions take place at the 
TRIPS  Council before drawing conclusion at this Council.  
3.140.   The representative of India delivered the following statement4:  
3.141.   With regard to item 3.A(iii),  I would like to thank the Chair person  of TRIPS Council for her 
report. India would like to echo the views of co -sponsors who spoke before me and align ourselves 
with the statement made by South Africa o n behalf of co -sponsors. It is regrettable that a decision 
remains elusive for this multilateral body on such a critical issue of global significance. Despite 
protracted deliberations over three years, we have disappointed ourselves and we have disappointe d 
the world that was anticipating a quick multilateral response from the organization and during a 
pandemic. Several rounds of submissions have been made on this issue, so we have not left any 
stone unturned in responding to all questions raised and clarif ication sought by Members and through 
extensive discussions, we presented facts and evidence to guide us in making a decision. I urge all 
Members to engage with good faith and conclude our discussion today by taking a decision. We hope 
we all are able to a gree for the extension of the MC12 decision to therapeutics and diagnostics as 
presented in the document IP/C/W/694 /Rev.1.  
3.142.   Now I will touch upon the reform part. We thank the Secretariat for the compilation in 
JOB/GC/359/Rev.2 . There is a need for continuing this process of incremental reform. Several 
suggestions by Members are in the pipeli ne's while a number of short -term implementation 
suggestions from India through our proposal WT/GC/W/874  dubbed as 30 for 30 have been 
implemented. There are certain medium to long term suggestions , which still require further 
consideration and we will work  towards that, like productive apps, website management, manner 
and extent of external stakeholder engagement and communication, WTO rules and procedures and 
committee specific suggestions.  
3.143.   In my bilateral or informal consultations , I realized that this p hrase of reform by doing is 
understood differently by different Members. We believe that reform or incremental change has to 
be Member -driven and consensus based that does not alter the rights and obligations of Members 
and adhere strictly to the foundatio nal principles of this organization. It should not be envisioned as 
a tool for creating new mandates or prioritizing new agenda while shelving the pending agenda and 
mandates. The Organization would be fit for purpose by improving the working of the O rganization 
to make it open, transparent, inclusive and efficient.  
3.144.   We would also like to thank and welcome the report G/L/1523 . We are delighted that the 
CTG and its 14 subsidiary bodies have implemented 127 improvements. My delegation has been 
engaged deeply and con structively in this exercise. While our paper envisages 30 improvements to 
the WTO before it completes 30 years, I believe we should up these and replicate the CTG successes 
elsewhere to make it 300 for 30!  
3.145.   The last item which is response to pandemic. On all these three items, I will submit the 
written statement since time is over. I will just highlight two submissions which we made on response 
to pandemic that is WT/GC/ W/866 and WT/GC/ W/867 relating to "role of telemedicine services" and 
another on "buildi ng a pool of health professionals to respond to pandemic and natural disasters" 
respectively. We look forward to further discussions both at the GC and at the Council for Trade in 
Services to analyze  lessons that have been learned and challenges experience d during the COVID -19 
pandemic. I look forward to these important discussions being reported to MC13 and seek further 
guidance from Ministers at the MC13 to continue future work on these two proposals. Lastly, on 
 
4 Following the meeting , the delegation of India submitted subsequently their  oral and written statements 
to the Secretariat for inclusion in the record. India's written statements have been included in the Annex, as 
requested.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 23 - 
 
  India's paper in CTG relating to response to pandemic , we would like to say that though it was not 
part of any notification obligation, but it was an effort on our part to explain the multifaceted 
response to the pandemic and the key role played by India's trade related government institu tions 
in the response to pandemic.  
3.146.   The Director -General  delivered the following statement:  
3.147.   Just two quick comments on two aspects. One is on reform by doing, I want to congratulate 
Members on the work that they are doing. It is very challenging,  and I am sure no matter the effort 
put in there will always be gaps. We have tried from the Secretariat to be as innovative as we can, 
and I am glad that Ecuador referred to the e -Delegate s platform  that we have put together , as well 
as e-agenda and others . We continue to try to come up with ways to make it easier , especially for 
small delegations to engage , within the resources that we have.  This morning we had a staff 
recognition day where we recognized some of those who have come up with these innovations , 
amongs t staff.  
3.148.   For the LDCs , we are very sympathetic about the limited resources. Just some advice it may 
be important for some smaller delegations to pull resources because I see that with the MC13 
negotiations coming , there is just no way. It is like what I sa id the other day, we need a lot of 
meetings to negotiate but these meetings are challenging for small delegations because you want 
to participate in all. Pulling resources like the Pacific Islands Forum has done could be very helpful 
to smaller delegations  because then a number of countries are represented , or the OECS . This  is 
just a suggestion. I have been trying to get some of the leaders to understand the enormous amount 
of work here at the WTO for their delegations and some have promised to beef up the ir missions 
with some additional help but not all can do it. So, we have to find  also other ways or means for 
least-developed countr y Members  to try to get the work done.  
3.149.   On the TRIPS waiver, I strongly want to urge that I hope the membership can come to s ome 
decision on this particular issue and not allow it to trail in our books. Bolivia  said something 
important, it was about  voluntary licensing , it has not been able to move forward. I hope that the 
private – all those that have the private sector actors - can move on this particular aspect, if it is to 
be a tool . But multiple tools are needed. Whilst all this is happening, it is important to say that some 
Members  have moved ahead to change the legislation to enable them to be able to work . For 
instance, Senegal is moving ahead with a whole supply chain on several types of vaccines, so whilst 
some are talking others are doing. I strongly also want to urge developing countr y Members  to move 
quickly on their legislation. We are working with 16 countries now,  the WHO, WIPO an d the WTO , 
to help them assess their legislative capabilities to use the flexibilities and to fix it. I just wanted to 
urge Members  to take a look at this and let us know if it is something that the tripartite agreement 
can help you with.  
3.150.   The Chairperson  thanked the Director -General for her input and those practical suggestions 
and for sharing some of the developments that are taking place.  
3.151.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:   
3.152.   We have taken note of the discussions and responses to the co -sponsors ' statement. We  are 
acutely aware that there is no consensus and there is no hop e for one , as it is clear t hat Members 
will continue to block this issu e. We had asked for a time limited waiver. In due course, we will be 
issuing a statement to draw a line on this question . 
3.153.   The Chairperson  noted that in light of the statements made, in particular with regard to 
TRIPS, there appeared to be no emerging agreement among the WTO membership, and it was clear 
that discussions would need to continue.  
3.154.   The General Council took note  of the Chairperson's statement  and of the  other  statements 
made.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 24 - 
 
  (iv) Work Programme on Elect ronic Commerce  
- Report by the Facilitator  
3.155.   The Chairperson  said that t here were four matters under this sub -item, which she would  
take up in turn, before opening the floor to delegations once at the very end.   
3.156.   She first turned  to Ambassador Dwarka -Canabady (Mauritius), in her capacity as Facilitator, 
to provide the WTO membership  with a report on the work and developments since the meeting of 
the General Council in November.  
3.157.   Ambassador Usha Dwarka -Canabady (Mauritius), Facilitator for the E -Commerce Work 
Programme and Moratorium , delivered the following report5: 
3.158.   Thank you for this opportunity to provide an update on the Work Program me on Electronic 
Commerce before the year end. As we prepare for MC13, I believe we can look back with a certain 
degree of satisfaction at the work that we have carried out this year and I wish to take this 
opportunity to thank all Members for their engage ment throughout these discussions.  
3.159.   Since my last report in November ( JOB/GC/368 ), we have held two dedicated discussions. 
The Dedicated Discussion on 14 November was the third meeting of the year to focus on the 
moratorium. Given the calls for more engagemen t on this issue and for evidence -based analysis, I 
invited the WTO Secretariat to present the findings of the report on Digital Trade for Development 
jointly prepared with the IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, and the World Bank. Representatives of the 
respective organiz ations attended the meeting and answered Members' questions including on two 
recent papers issued by the IMF and OECD. The Joint Report had not yet been launched at the time 
of the meeting. It has since then been officially launched during the e -Week of UN CTAD and is now 
accessible on the WTO website.  
3.160.   At the Dedicated Discussion held on Friday, 8 December, Members started consideration of 
text-based proposals for a draft Ministerial decision. Three submissions were considered in this 
regard. Two of them ar e on the agenda of today's meeting ( WT/GC/W/909  from Canada, Switzerland 
and other co -sponsors, and WT/GC/W/911  from South Africa). A third one, from the ACP Group, was 
made available in the room and subsequently circulated in WT/GC/W/916 . All three draft d ocuments 
call for the continued re -invigoration of the Work Programme in line with the 1998 mandate. Some 
contain additional elements, such as emphasis on the development dimension and the reporting 
process on the work programme to the General Council and/ or other relevant bodies and the timings 
thereof. There were equally proposals for the creation of a trust fund and suggestions for the 
development of a more level playing field. With respect to the moratorium, two of the draft 
documents call for the exten sion of the moratorium until MC14 and one calls for its termination 
at MC13.  
3.161.   Despite known differences, I am pleased to report that discussions on Friday last were 
constructive, and delegations offered specific comments and suggestions on each of the draft  
proposals put forward.  
3.162.   In terms of format for a draft ministerial Decision, there seems to be a preference for 
maintaining the structure and brevity of recent Ministerial Decisions.  
3.163.   Since the three draft documents presented at the meeting bear a number of similar 
elements, these commonalities emerged during discussions, for example, with respect to 
acknowledging progress made in the reinvigoration of the Work Programme; upholding the 
development dimension of the work programme; the need to continue worki ng with other IGOs to 
address identified challenges and deepening discussions on certain issues.  
3.164.   There was less convergence with regard to the reporting structure and the level of 
prescription for reporting. There was nonetheless flexibility from the propo nents to accommodate 
the concerns raised.  
 
5 The Facilitator's report was subsequen tly circulated in document JOB/GC/377 . WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 25 - 
 
  3.165.   The extension of the moratorium remained the main point of contention. Members reiterated 
well-known positions, and some renewed their calls for including reference to continuing discussions 
on the definition, scop e and impact of the moratorium. I noted the readiness to discuss further and 
have encouraged delegations to put forward proposals on scope and definition from their individual 
perspectives.  
3.166.   More work is certainly needed if we are to find a middle -ground, p articularly on the 
moratorium. I have requested delegations to reflect further on the three draft proposals currently 
on the table and to send any additional comments they may have by Friday, 15 December, close of 
business.  
3.167.   I intend to hold consultations i n mid -January to deepen our discussion on these draft texts 
for a Ministerial decision. This will take place ahead of the Dedicated Discussion scheduled for 
25 January. The purpose would be to find language that captures the commonalities between the 
three  texts on the table.  
3.168.   Before concluding, let me recall the more recent communications from the LDC Group in 
document WT/GC/W/905 , from India and South Africa in document WT/GC/W/902/Rev.1 , and from 
South Africa in WT/GC/W/910  – the latter being on the agenda of today's meeting. As our discussions 
on thematic issues have concluded, we have not been able to consid er them in the Dedicated 
Discussions. Whilst I remain guided by Members as to whether there should be special sessions to 
discuss these papers at a later point, I did inform Members at our meeting last Friday, that they are 
free to propose language for a M inisterial decision based on their perspectives. Should there be 
anything specific in these papers that the proponents would wish to see reflected in a potential draft 
ministerial decision, they are welcome to propose any specific textual language.  
3.169.   I look  forward to Members' continued engagement during consultations in January and the 
forthcoming dedicated discussion.  
3.170.   The Chairperson  thanked  Ambassador Dwarka -Canabady. Before moving to the next matter, 
she noted that at her recent meeting with Chairpersons  of regular WTO bodies, she was informed 
that discussions on the work programme were also taking place in the respective bodies – although 
at different levels of engagement.  
- Challenges for Digital Industrialization In Developing Countries – Communication  
from South Africa (WT/GC/W/910 ) 
3.171.   The Chairperson invited the delegation of South Africa to introduce the communication titled 
"Challenges for Digital Industrialization in Developing Countries ".  
3.172.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
3.173.   Our paper on challenges to digital industrialization  in developing countries such as ours 
shares practical examples of how the dominance of global tech firms and other features of these 
markets undermine economic diversi fication and inclusive supply chains. Sharing case examples can 
help to enrich our discussions, even if we hold differing views.  
3.174.   The concentration of market power, particularly by global tech giants, is resulting in uneven 
participation in global commerce , notably hindering the growth of Micro, Small, and Medium -sized 
Enterprises (MSMEs) and digital start -ups. Our delegation views the Electronic Transmissions (ET) 
moratorium as one of the significant factors exacerbating these disparities. This moratorium has 
been in place for a quarter of a century. There is no consensus on this issue.  
3.175.   We submitted a comprehensive presentation of our paper during the dedicated discussion 
on 8 December. For the record, we will submit this paper to the Secretariat. We receiv ed valuable 
feedback from several delegations during the dedicated discussion, and we look forward to studying 
these insights in detail when the minutes are circulated.  
3.176.   We acknowledge the recent study jointly published by the WTO Secretariat, the Internati onal 
Monetary Fund (IMF), the Organi zation for Economic Co -operation and Development (OECD), the 
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), and the World Bank. While the WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 26 - 
 
  study primarily emphasizes  revenue losses, we wish to underscore tha t our core concern, articulated 
consistently by South Africa and others, is the erosion of policy space to employ tariffs as a tool for 
industrial development. This central challenge has not yet been met with credible responses from 
the proponents of the m oratorium.  
3.177.   The contention raised by proponents about the supposedly negligible impact of the 
moratorium on revenue is a straw man argument. We must underline that neither the recent studies 
nor the positions advocated by the proponents have adequately add ressed this fundamental 
challenge expressed by South Africa and others.  
3.178.   At the April dedicated discussion, my delegation posed four questions to proponents that 
would assist in taking this discussion to fruitful avenues. These questions have, by and large , 
returned blank.  
3.179.   In sum, these questions concern the scope and definition of electronic transmissions; the 
extent of 'online imports' of electronic transmissions in different countries; the substantive basis for 
discrimination between digitizable products and physical prod ucts; and the potential foreclosure of 
possibilities for digital industrialization  due to the extension of the moratorium.  
3.180.   As indicated by our Minister at the Mini -Ministerial on 11 December, my delegation is not 
convinced by the arguments offered by the p roponents so far. Some of the insights from the reports 
presented to us seemed skewed in favour of the heuristic biases of the proponents. We are not in a 
position to agree to the extension of the moratorium.  
3.181.   We remain ready to engage constructively on thi s issue, including fact -based and evidence -
based discussion, while countries exercise their rights to use tariffs.  
- Draft Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce - 
Communication from Australia; Canada; Chile; Costa Rica; Georgia ; Hong Kong, 
China; Iceland; Israel; Korea, Republic of; Liechtenstein; Moldova, Republic of; 
Montenegro; Norway; New Zealand; Paraguay; Peru; Singapore; Switzerland; 
Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen And Matsu; Ukraine and The 
United Ki ngdom ( WT/GC/W/909 )  
- Draft Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce – 
Communication from South Africa ( WT/GC/W/911 )  
3.182.   The Chairperson  then turned  to the remaining two communications, both containing draft 
language for a Ministerial decision on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Before inviting 
the respective  delegations to introduce the communications, she recalled  that, as heard from 
Ambassador Dwarka -Canabady, these draft decisions had been  discussed extensively at the 
Dedicated Discussion held on 8 December. She reminded delegations that the Dedicated Discussions 
were held under the auspices of the General Council and that there were minutes for those meetings.  
In light of the extensive agenda and to ensure an efficient us e of time, she encourage d delegations 
to avoid duplication of discussions on this item and to intervene only if they had  something new to 
add. She then invited Switzerland to  introduce communication WT/GC/W/909 . 
3.183.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
3.184.   Switzerland is making this statement on behalf of the following Members who are 
co-sponsors of WT/GC/W/909/Rev .1: Australia; Canada; Chile; Costa Rica; Georgia; Hong  Kong, 
China; Iceland; Israel; Korea; Liechtenstein; Moldova; Montenegro; North Macedonia; Norway; New 
Zealand; Paraguay; Peru; Qatar; Singapore; Switzerland; Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, 
Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu; Ukraine; United Kingdom and Urugu ay. 
3.185.   Before presenting our draft for a decision on e -commerce at MC13, we would like first to 
acknowledge the leadership of Ambassador Dwarka -Canabady, whose facilitation of the Dedicated 
Discussions has been instrumental in reviving works under the 1998 Wo rk Programme.  
3.186.   Second, while we present today our proposal for a draft decision on the Work Programme 
and moratorium on e -commerce, we have received valuable inputs in bilateral contacts as well as WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 27 - 
 
  during the meeting of 8 December of the Dedicated Discussio n. We would like to thank in particular 
CARICOM  and the OECS for their feedback and the valuable exchange.  We are currently working on 
integrating these inputs – in particular on the importance to reflect the development dimension – 
with a view to submit a  revised draft decision.  We would also like to thank the ACP Group for their 
proposal for a draft decision contained in communication WT/GC/W/916 . 
3.187.   It is clear that there  is strong  and growing  convergence  across  the membership  on extending 
the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions. We are looking forward to further 
engagement with all interested Members.  
3.188.   Turning to our communication specifically, our proposal intends to capture the progress 
accomplished since MC12. It aims at continuing work under the e -commerce Work Programme  and 
extending  the e-commerce  Moratorium  until the next Ministerial  Conference We welcome the 
exchanges under the Dedicated Discussions, which have contributed to the marked increase in 
engagement under th e Work Programme.  
3.189.   In order to build on this positive engagement, we now call to focus our discussions. Selecting 
a set of specific trade related issues will allow delegations to address issues of particular importance 
to Members in more depth and dedicate their resources more effectively.  
3.190.   On the e -commerce moratorium, there is a growing body of evidence supporting the 
importance of not applying customs duties. Indeed, just last week another study by the IMF, OECD, 
UNCTAD, World Bank and WTO on "Digital Trad e and Development" was released.  
3.191.   The bottom line coming out of the vast majority of these studies is that not applying customs 
duties benefits businesses in all member countries, LDCs, developing, and developed, particularly 
for micro, small, medium -sized enterprises (MSMEs), which are the lifeblood of the global economy.  
3.192.   Hence, we are comforted in the view that continuing to provide to each other the guarantee 
to not impose customs duties on electronic transmissions is the right path to follow. We strongly  
believe that the lapse of the moratorium would degrade the international regulatory framework for 
digital trade, thereby causing significant uncertainty and unpredictability to the global economy 
given an increasing proportion of trade is digital.  
3.193.   We welc ome further support to this draft decision and stand ready to adapt it to reflect the 
needs and concerns of the membership.  
3.194.   The Chairperson  then invited the delegation of South Africa to introduce communication 
WT/GC/W/911 .  
3.195.   The representative of South Afri ca delivered the following statement:   
3.196.   In the interest  of time, we wish to say that our core points are packaged in the statement 
we made earlier,  and we would like to distribute the time to friends.  
3.197.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
3.198.   Recognizing the significance of the WPEC, our Group acknowledges the dual nature of 
opportunities and challenges presented by the digital revolution. The global digital divide, however, 
has hindered inclusi vity and limited the benefits derived from these opportunities. The COVID -19 
pandemic has further underscored these disparities. Emphasizing a development -oriented approach, 
it is imperative for all Members to unite in revitalizing the work programme.  
3.199.   For African countries, industrial development is a primary developmental goal, as outlined 
in Agenda 2063 —The Africa We Want. For us, the WPEC must contribute to these objectives. The 
issues raised by the South African paper on challenges to digital industrial ization warrant 
consideration in this regard.  
3.200.   Regarding the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions, initiated in 1998, 
divergences persist on definitional issues and scope. The African Group advocates that the renewal WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 28 - 
 
  of the moratorium sh ould not be automatic, and we are committed to collaborating with all 
delegations to address and resolve these issues collectively.  
3.201.   The representative of Djibouti , on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
3.202.   We thank the Facilitator for her work and leadership in the dedicated discussions on the e -
commerce work programme. The LDC Group delivered a contribution to the work programme on 
17 November, WT/GC/W/905 .  We will make mention of a few elements we wish to be considere d 
for the reporting to the Ministers at MC13 when the decision is up for renewal.   
3.203.   Despite certain progress observed in LDCs, notably the increase in broadband Internet 
access in certain LDCs, we are faced with infrastructural, technical and technological constraints. 
Thus, LDCs need appropriate investment and support to build their capacities to participate in 
e-commerce.  
3.204.   Regarding the moratorium, it is important to conduct a study focused specifically on LDCs 
that provides technical assessments of the imp acts of the moratorium on customs duties and on VAT 
systems, taking into account the unique characteristics of LDCs, especially with regard to the 
mechanisms specific to them or the absence of such mechanisms.  
3.205.   The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of the OECS , delivered the following 
statement:  
3.206.   On the e -commerce issues, we would like to thank the Facilitator  for her leadership,  and we 
thank all proponents for their proposals. We are broadly supportive of the renewal of the Work 
Programme and the extension of the Moratorium on Customs Duties on Electronic Transmissions. 
The Work Programme must reflect a clear development dimension. It  is also important for there to 
be ongoing discussions on the definition, scope and impact of the Moratorium. We take note of the 
recently submitted ACP proposal in document WT/GC/W/ 916. We believe that the ACP Draft Decision 
on the Work Programme and Mora torium could serve as a useful bridge around which to structure 
our conversations.  
3.207.   The representative of Samoa , on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following statement:  
3.208.   The ACP Group commends the work of the Facilitator and look s forward to her cont inuing 
the dedicated discussions. We welcome the submissions of other Members. While our new 
submission WT/GC/W/916  is not on the agenda , the ACP Group has been working on this submission 
as a contribution to the reinvigoration of the work programme on E -Commerce. We covered the 
areas in the thematic sessions such as emerging supportive legislation such as consumer protection, 
privacy, transaction laws, tax laws, and areas of digital divide, for the e -commerce platform.  
3.209.   Our members are working on and choosi ng which legislation is needed and how much of it 
in order to facilitate the growth of e -commerce, build infrastructure, skills, payment systems, and 
legislation to protect consumers. Legislation alone is not a panacea for e -commerce and its 
development ro le. Too much legislation could defeat our development goals. Legislation must match 
the development needs and e -readiness goals of each member. We need not only digital trade, we 
must have targeted assistance, investment, and cooperation.  
3.210.   Our submission al so takes up the question of the moratorium. We looked into the 
antecedents of the treatment of software while in the carrier medium and treatment of content for 
tariff purposes, other products that were traded in carrier media, to later transform by virtue  of the 
technology into digital form. In the reinvigoration of the work program, it will help developing 
countries and LDCs to adapt to the transformation and proper analysis be prepared to compare what 
we were actually doing during this transformation, ra ther than relying on estimates or predictions. 
In addressing revenue gain for governments, we must also balance our evaluation to consider the 
impact on our consumers and businesses, especially small medium sized businesses, and the 
enterprises of women an d youth.  
3.211.   We conducted internal discussions with the UN, OECD, and heard presentations of some of 
our own Members on their work on digital tax and value added tax systems which are also not a WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 29 - 
 
  panacea. We also listened with interest in the presentations from  Indonesia. At the same time, we 
see that the tariff charge is zero. Some Members have raised other elements that can help us.  
3.212.   The work programme must continue its reinvigoration to take the progress in our discussions 
further to a mutually acceptable land ing in the context of the WTO. In the meantime, we should 
extend the moratorium which is part of that discussion. You will see we have an annex in this regard. 
We can come together and find common ground and do no harm, by continuing the reinvigoration 
of work programme with information exchanges, deeper dive discussions on the regulations, 
technologies, VAT systems, customs duties, methodologies to reduce the digital divide, in order to 
arrive at the most pragmatic way to consider all of the relevant eleme nts. 
3.213.   The WTO can upgrade its convening role to include key international organizations  to come 
forward with targeted reports with a view to advancing the development aspects of e - commerce. 
We thank the Director General for kicking off the joint report "Di gital Trade for Development". We 
are still studying the document.  
3.214.   The representative of Fiji, on behalf of the Pacific Group , delivered the following statement:  
3.215.   The Pacific Group thanks the Facilitator for her report and continued efforts to steer Members 
towards intensifying discussions on key issues of the Work Programme including the development 
dimension of digital trade. E -commerce has significantly transformed businesses, trade, investment 
and consumer habits across the world even before COVID -19. Thi s trend has only been amplified by 
the pandemic in the last couple of years. It has also gained traction as one of the major sources of 
development.  
3.216.   We recognize that the dedicated discussions have been constructive,  and Members are 
engaging including thro ugh knowledge - and experience -sharing sessions. We welcome further 
dedicated discussions including the one envisaged for 25 January 2024.  
3.217.   We also welcome the submissions of other Members, most of which call for the extension of 
the moratorium on electroni c transmissions up to MC14. Although we have yet to reach a common 
understanding on this issue, particularly the scope, definition and impact of the moratorium, we 
believe that its extension to MC14 would provide sufficient time to carry out necessary impl ications 
assessment of such a decision.  
3.218.   We also appreciate the suggestion to establish a voluntary fund that could provide 
developing including least developed Members, with targeted support to address the digital divide.  
3.219.   As part of the ACP, we support th e recent submission by the Group reflected in document 
WT/GC/W/916 . Although it is not included in the agenda among other key submissions of Members 
presented today, we speak to it and support as co -sponsors and urge Members to consider it 
favourably.  
3.220.   The representative of Guyana , on behalf of CARICOM , delivered the following statement:  
3.221.   On the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, the CARICOM Group thanks the Facilitator 
for her report and the respective delegations for their interventions on the submissions as contained 
in WT/GC/W/909 , WT/GC/W/910  and WT/GC/W/911 . Given the importance that the Group attributes 
to the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, as well as the importance we attach to the renewal 
of the moratorium, we have every intention to continue engaging robustly with other Members to 
outline a balanced and acceptable Ministerial Decision. For us, some key elements for inclusion in 
the Ministerial Decision would be as follows:  
− Recognition of the value of the work undertaken under the Work Programme since MC12 
and the progress achieved regarding efforts to reinvigorate this work;  
− An instruction to further deepen engagement in line with WT/L/274 , with continued emphasis 
on the development dimension;  
− Guidance from Ministers on more -effective engagement under the Work Programme, with 
an emphasis on tangible, beneficial outcomes, especially for developing country Members 
and LDCs;  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 30 - 
 
  − An instruction relating to effective post -MC13 coll aboration with pertinent international 
organisations on practical approaches to addressing challenges and leveraging 
opportunities;  
− A decision to renew the moratorium on the imposition of customs duties on electronic 
transmissions until the 14th Ministerial Conference;  
− A recognition of the need to continue deliberations on the moratorium and an instruction in 
this regard;  
− An agreement to report to the General Council periodically regarding the progress of work 
under the Work Programme, as well as  to MC14.  
 
3.222.   In this connection, we welcome the ACP Group 's submission as contained in WT/GC/W/916 , 
including the draft Ministerial Decision attached to it as an Annex. We think it outlines a balanced 
approach and we do hope it can form the basis for fruitful  engagement of the Membership in the 
weeks ahead. As such, we stand ready to continue our constructive engagement in the effort to 
outline a concise and balanced Ministerial Decision following the break. We remain hopeful that this 
matter would be one that  we settle here in Geneva in the weeks before MC13.  
3.223.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
3.224.   On e-commerce, Brazil considers that the dedicated discussions, focused on the digital 
divide, were a step in the right direction towards i mplementing the  MC12 mandate of reinvigorating 
the Work Programme in line with its development dimension.  
3.225.   We would like to continue and deepen discussion s after MC13 under the Work Programme 
on topics of interest brought forward by developing and leas t-developed Members, such as transfer 
of technology, competition, and consumer protection, with a view to reaching concrete outcomes in 
the following Ministerial Conference ( MC14 ).  
3.226.   In light of the discussions held under the Work Programme and other fora on the scope and 
definition of the moratorium, particularly on its impact on taxation and policy space for the promotion 
of the digital economy, we are undertaking comprehensive internal consultations on these proposals,  
and we hope to be able to come back wi th specific questions and comments in the next meeting.  
3.227.   The representative of the Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
3.228.   The Philippines would like to thank the Facilitator for her report, which has demonstrated 
the strong engagement of Members an d the revitalization of the work program's development 
dimension. We also thank South Africa for its submission on the results of its market inquiry, which 
provides insights on competition -related concerns for developing countries and MSMEs in leveling 
the playing field, as has been evidenced in recent anti -trust cases.  
3.229.   The Philippines views the critical role of e -commerce in expanding the digital economy and 
empowering the integration of MSMEs into global value chains. We value creating and maintaining 
stable and predictable rules and disciplines for the digital trading environment and for this reason, 
we support the core elements of the draft Ministerial Decisions contained in WT/GC/W/909  and 
WT/GC/W/916 . To ensure greater predictability and to address the  concerns of other Members, we 
would see value in a Ministerial Decision that mandates that definitive clarity on the scope and 
definition of the moratorium be reached by MC14.  
3.230.   The representative of Tanzania  delivered the following statement:  
3.231.   We align with  the statement s of the LDC Group, the African Group and the ACP Group . We 
express our appreciation to the Facilitator for having ably led discussions in the ecommerce dedicated 
sessions.  We support the proposal for renew of the ecommerce Work Programme, in  order to provide 
Members with a platform to continue discussions on the subject.  
3.232.   As an LDC, Tanzania is endeavoring  to bridge the digital divide from within and catching up 
with others which are ahead particularly through building necessary infrastructur e and putting in 
place right policies and strategies.  With regards to the moratorium, we found the discussions and 
experience sharing sessions useful. However, more needs to be done in terms of assessing the 
revenue loss implications to developing countrie s and LDCs by maintaining the moratorium. The WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 31 - 
 
  lapse of the moratorium will give countries the liberty of choice to charge or not the customs duties 
on certain electronic transmissions, hence its effect to ecommerce will be minute.  
3.233.   The representative of Japan delivered the following statement:  
3.234.   Japan truly commends the Facilitator for the leadership in the previous discussions on the 
E-commerce Work Programme.  Looking ahead of MC13, we thank the joint proponents of 
WT/GC/W/909  and South Africa and the ACP Group for the circulation of the respective proposals 
on the drafts of Ministerial Declaration on Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. From our 
perspective, as ever we should aim at making the moratorium permanent or at least extend the 
moratorium at  MC13, as well as continue discussion in the Work Programme under the Dedicated 
Discussion format. For this reason, even though Japan is not the proponent, we can positively 
consider the proposal of WT/GC/W/ 909. We also appreciate the ACP Group's submission  of a 
constructive proposal toward MC13. Looking at emerging support for extension, we hope we should 
decide its extension toward MC13 in light of this recognition of the emerging support.  
3.235.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following st atement:  
3.236.   The UK would like to start by commending the efforts by the Facilitator, and in particular, all 
of her leadership and guidance throughout this process.  The UK aligns with the statement made by 
Switzerland, on behalf of the co -sponsors. The UK is p leased to co -sponsor communication 
WT/GC/ W/909 . Renewal of the moratorium will preserve the foundation of global digital trade and  
provide certainty for consumers and businesses around the world.  
3.237.   We do not have to wait for the Ministerial to deliver an out come. Renewing the moratorium 
is something that we can and  should do right here. We welcome the ACP Group's recent 
communication seeking to extend the moratorium.  Over 100 Members are now calling for the 
moratorium to be extended at this time. We urge Memb ers to join with a growing consensus – to 
get this done before the Ministerial.  
3.238.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
3.239.   We extend our sincere appreciation to the Facilitator  for her tireless efforts in facilitating 
discussions am ong WTO Members throughout the year to address critical issues related to member 
participation in digital trade.  We envision that these discussions will continue in the future, with a 
sharpened focus that will lead to concrete outcomes actionable by Member s, particularly in bridging 
the digital divide.  
3.240.   We also would like to support the submission by South Africa and wholeheartedly agree with 
the findings of the South African Market Inquiry, which clearly demonstrate the negative impact of 
the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions on digital industrialization in 
developing countries.  
3.241.   As we approach the MC13, we urge Members to uphold the policy space and flexibility 
required for the implementation of Customs Duties on Electronic Transmission.  The moratorium, 
which has been in place since 1998, has continuously hindered developing Members to leverage 
electronic transmissions for their domestic digital economies.  Hence, we call for collective efforts to 
address the current digital t rade imbalances and set a definitive end to the moratorium.  The 
termination of the moratorium will not only level the playing field for developing countries but also 
allow us to gather concrete evidence of its positive impact on our economies.  
3.242.   This evidenc e will serve as a valuable basis for future Member discussions within the 
framework of the Work Programme on E -Commerce.  Therefore, recognizing the gravity of this 
matter, Indonesia stands in opposition to making any decisions regarding the moratorium at t he 
General Council m eeting. We firmly maintain that this matter merits deliberation at the highest level, 
namely at MC13 . 
3.243.   The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
3.244.   I would first like to echo thanks to the Facilitator  for her tireless dedication in leading the 
revitalization of work under the Work Programme; this increased engagement since MC12 has led WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 32 - 
 
  to valuable and fruitful discussions, that will form the basis of ongoing engagement related to the 
rapidly evolving world of electronic commerce.  
3.245.   We have heard and would strongly agree that the Work Programme provides the space that 
Members need for vital and relevant e -commerce issues to be examined in depth; and indee d, there 
is much to talk about, including the importance of applying the development dimension to these 
discussions.  
3.246.   We have also heard today, at the Dedicated Discussion on 8 December, and during 
consultations over the last number of weeks and months, an  overwhelming number of Members 
across the spectrum of development call for the renewal of the moratorium on customs duties on 
electronic transmissions. Most recently, we see this within the communication submitted and 
presented by the ACP Group, which we found to be very useful.  
3.247.   Maintaining the e -commerce moratorium alongside the Work Programme supports the core 
WTO principle of providing stability and predictability that help consumers and businesses, 
particularly MSMEs and women -led companies, maximize the economic benefits stemming from 
technological development.  
3.248.   We thank Members for their time and engagement on drafting a call to renew the Work 
Programme  together with the moratorium over the last number of weeks under proposal 
WT/GC/W/909 ; we will conti nue to work together with all interested Members and groups of 
Members on amending our proposal to reflect consultations.  
3.249.   The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement:  
3.250.   I would like to express our sincere appreciation to the Facilitator  for her great efforts in 
contributing to the success in reinvigorating the work programme. We also would like to highlight 
that the development dimension of the debate of key e -commerce has been very well, and we 
appreciate that very much. Thailand would like to also thank South Africa for presenting 
WT/GC/W/910 , which highlights the challenges and difficulties to promote competition and enhance 
digital industrialization. From their experience, there are some elements in the paper that we are 
very intereste d to continue the discussion on the issues that South Africa have highlighted. We also 
would like to thank Samoa, on behalf of the ACP, for WT/GC/W/916 . 
3.251.   We also thank Switzerland, Canada , as well as South Africa for putting forward the draft text 
for Membe rs' consideration. We see the commonalities in these proposals,  and we hope that they 
will contribute to the discussion in the work programme. Needless to say, this is an important issue 
for many Members – developing , developed , LDCs. We hope that Members will not only continue to 
deep dive the discussion, but also come to a decision on  the moratorium.  
3.252.   For Thailand, our position is that this is one of the low hanging fruits , which can be concluded 
before MC13. But frankly, I am not very hopeful that will ha ppen before MC13. But from our point 
of view, we see that the benefits of maintaining current practice  and the continuation of e -commerce 
moratorium until MC14. So that is our position for the moment.  
3.253.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following  statement:  
3.254.   I would like to start by putting on record my delegation's appreciation to the Facilitator  for 
her able leadership in advancing discussions on the Work Programme on E -Commerce (WPEC). We 
would also like to thank South Africa for presenting thei r two communications. Allow me to share 
three points.  
3.255.   First, Singapore is pleased to co -sponsor the draft Ministerial Decision ( WT/GC/W/909 ) to 
continue the Work Programme on E -Commerce and extend the Moratorium on Customs Duties on 
E-Commerce. We urge Members to join this emerging consensus as co -sponsors, and to accelerate 
efforts to reach agreement on a Ministerial Decision early,  rather than leaving it to the eleventh hour 
at MC13.  
3.256.   Second, Singapore welcomes the rejuvenated discussions at the WPEC Dedicated Sessions 
since MC12, which is in line with Ministers' instructions. Like other Members, Singapore has actively WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 33 - 
 
  contributed b y sharing our experiences through five presentations that deal with a range of issues 
such as (a) our new overseas vendor registration system; (b) the Digital Economy Agreements 
(DEAs); and (c) trade digitalization . We appreciate the active engagement by M embers and hope 
that these experience -sharing sessions have helped to stimulate a fruitful exchange of ideas and 
fostered deeper understanding of these important topics.  
3.257.   Third, we must avoid politicizing  the Moratorium and engage in more evidence -based 
discussions. Several useful studies on this issue have been issued, including the joint international 
organization  report6 on "Digital Trade and Development" launched last week. The report highlighted 
that the moratorium's impact  on government revenue is est imated to be very small (below 0.33 per 
cent of overall government revenue on average), and that value added taxes are viable alternative 
policy tools. While there will no doubt continue to be divergence of views over issues such as the 
scope and definitio n of electronic transmissions, we hope that the latest evidence -based studies can 
help to bridge such gaps. We further encourage bringing external stakeholders, such as private 
sector players, to complement our discussions.  
3.258.   The representative of Chile delivered the following statement:  
3.259.   Our delegation believes that Members have held a series of fruitful exchanges on the agreed 
topics under the excellent stewardship of the Facilitator . Our delegation is of the opinion that the 
Work Programme on E -Commerce has  been reinvigorated, and the idea is that we should continue 
to identify trade -related issues, especially those of interest to developing and least developed 
countries, to further these discussions.  
3.260.   In our delegation's view, the moratorium plays a signifi cant role in the increasing 
digitalization of cross -border trade. Based on our discussions, Chile has reached the conclusion that 
there is ample evidence confirming the importance of not imposing customs duties on electronic 
transmissions, as the moratoriu m benefits businesses, especially micro, small and medium -sized 
enterprises, which drive the global economy and require greater certainty for their business plans.  
Therefore, we hope, as others have said before us , that we can have a decision on the morato rium 
as soon as possible.  
3.261.   The representative of Costa Rica  delivered the following statement:  
3.262.   I would like to thank the Facilitator  for her report and her leadership and efforts in this area. 
For Costa Rica, it is essential that the moratorium on electroni c transmissions be maintained and 
become a permanent decision as soon as possible so that trade actors, particularly those from 
developing countries, LDCs and MSMEs, have security and predictability regarding the conditions 
they currently enjoy. Evidence s hows that the alleged loss of tax revenue due to the moratorium is 
either non -existent or completely marginal when compared to its benefits to competitiveness, 
economic growth, technology transfer, the bridging of the digital divide and development. Liftin g the 
moratorium would lead to less competitiveness and increased costs, which would affect developing 
countries in particular, widen the digital divide and impact negatively on MSMEs.  
3.263.   Costa Rica is therefore pleased to endorse WT/GC/W/ 910, which is aimed at continuing 
discussions within the framework of the Work Programme and maintaining the moratorium until 
MC14. We also welcome the recent proposal by the ACP Group, which is in the same vein and 
contains very interesting points, such as continuing collaboration with other relevant international 
organizations and stakeholders.  
3.264.   Regarding the documents submitted by South Africa, I wish to point out that Costa Rica is 
concerned about several aspects. In particular, we do not agree wit h the paragraph in the draft 
decision concerning the removal of the moratorium. We are concerned that efforts are being made, 
in the name of development, to reverse the openness that has existed in this sector since 1998, with 
disregard for the evidence an d data showing its benefits.  
 
6 Footnote reproduced as provided in the statement sent by the delegation for inclusion in the records: 
"Digital Trade and Development " released on 7 December by the WTO, World Bank, OECD, International 
Monetary Fund, a nd UNCTAD.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 34 - 
 
  3.265.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
3.266.   Bangladesh aligns with the statement by the LDC Group . Our delegation thanks the 
Facilitator for the commendable work and her report. Our delegation supports that any discussion 
on the E-Commerce Work Programme must include development as the central element with a view 
to ensuring that the developing countries and LDCs accrue benefit f rom e -commerce. We look 
forward to participating in the e -commerce informal discussion in January 2024.  
3.267.   The LDC Group's recent communication ( WT/GC/W/905 ) captures the importance of 
e-commerce for our economies. Our delegation earlier proposed, and today w e reiterate the call, 
that the review of the e -commerce Work Programme should be maintained as a standing agenda 
item in the GC and the other relevant WTO bodies.  
3.268.   Bangladesh welcomes South Africa's communications ( WT/GC/W/910  and WT/GC/W/911 ) 
which are mos t relevant for discussion under this item. Our delegation looks forward to working with 
South Africa and other delegations.  
3.269.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
3.270.   First, let me thank Ambassador Usha Dwarka -Canabady for f acilitating this important work.  
3.271.   We invested this year in number of robust discussions on the scope and impact of the 
moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions as well as digital inclusion, trust in the 
digital economy, and digital trade fac ilitation issues.  
3.272.   Furthering predictability and confidence in the digital environment, by extending the 
moratorium, can be a concrete step that WTO Members take to foster robust digital economic activity 
and support digital inclusion that encompasses the d eveloping world.  
3.273.   We are pleased to see a broad base of Members in support of extending both the Work 
Program me and the moratorium, as evidenced by the recent WT/GC/ W/909 and ACP Group draft 
decisions.  
3.274.   We are also heartened to hear that the WT/GC/W/ 909 proponents are positively considering 
the inputs received from CARICOM and OECS.  
3.275.   We think this is a constructive approach that can help us achieve a strong outcome that 
ensures that the Work Program me's foc us on development is strengthened at MC13,  and the 
moratorium remains in place while these important discussions proceed.  
3.276.   First, in response to South Africa's submission on digital industrialization, the United States 
is reviewing with relevant authoritie s. The paper raises complex issues,  and we are consulting with 
the various agencies implicated. The United States certainly supports the right of Members  to 
regulate competition in digital markets. However, we are not convinced that the moratorium inhibits  
Members' ability to regulate digital firms in their markets, including with respect to competition.  
3.277.   Turning to the draft decisions, the submission by several WTO Members, WT/GC/W/909 , 
supports the objective of maintaining the moratorium and continuing the  e-commerce work 
program me in order to provide space for robust exploration within the work program me. We also 
welcome the room document submitted by the ACP Group last week during the work program me 
discussion.  
3.278.   However, the draft ministerial decision from  South Africa, WT/GC/W/909  does not. 
Additionally, we caution against efforts to utilize the WTO as a mechanism for technical assistance. 
As noted in earlier work program me discussions, many mechanisms already exist both through 
international organizations and government efforts.  
3.279.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
3.280.   We thank the Facilitator for her report. We also thank South Africa for presenting its paper 
contained in document WT/GC/ W/910. While it is evident that some Members,  especially the home WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 35 - 
 
  states of large technology platforms , have managed to harness the full benefits of technological 
advancements and of ecommerce, we believe some the conclusions of the Competition Commission 
of South African regarding how the Mo ratorium on Electronic Transmission is undermining digital 
industrialization in Developing Countries requires further reflection.  
3.281.   We believe a comprehensive assessment of the welfare effects of the moratorium would 
reveal that it bolsters the competitiven ess and growth of Developing Countries MSMEs who are able 
to access intermediate content at cheaper price as well as strengthen market linkages  not to mention 
consumer surplus. We would however engage with South Africa to enable us gain insight into the 
scope, methodology and findings of the paper.  
3.282.   We thank the proponent of WT/GC/ W/909 for their statement. Nigeria consistently called for 
the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce to be approached from a Development Perspective 
so we can collectively explore the appropriate policy instruments within the WTO toolbox that could 
be deployed to foster the development of ecommerce ecosystem in Developing Countries.  
3.283.   On the moratorium, we believe that the scope and the definition need to be clarified so 
Members can understand the scope of their commitment. Hitherto, it has remained ambiguous, and 
WTO Members have conflicting interpretation of these issues. However, given that achieving 
consensus on this issue is unlikely at MC13 due to time constraint, it should be a ccorded priority and 
taken up post MC13. Regarding the moratorium on Imposing Customs Duties on Electronic 
Transmissions, Nigeria believes it should be extended temporarily at MC13. Nigeria holds this view 
for three important reasons. First, the non -renewa l of the moratorium would undermine the 
predictability of global e -commerce environment, and this would negatively affect businesses and 
consumers. Next, it will undermine the competitiveness and growth of our MSMEs who would be 
unable to access intermedia te content at cheaper price. Third, given the dynamic effects of the 
moratorium, we believe the benefits outweigh the cost and non -renewal will only mean the WTO has 
chosen not to be responsive to the economic realities of the 21st century.  
3.284.   We thank South Africa for their statement. This draft decision further articulates the 
conclusions of WT/GC/W/ 910. Nigeria supports the temporary extension of the moratorium for 
reasons we shared earlier and in the interest of time we will not repeat ourselves. We will co ntinue 
to engage South Africa constructively towards ensuring the renewal of moratorium and the adoption 
of a development centric work programme at MC13.  
3.285.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  delivered the following statement:  
3.286.   On the Work Programme on E -Commerce, Hong Kong China (HKC)  aligns itself with the 
statement made by Ambassador Bollinger of Switzerland on behalf of the co -sponsors, including 
Hong Kong China , of the draft MC13 Ministerial Decision in WT/GC/W/909/Rev.1 .  
3.287.   HKC cannot agree m ore about the excellent leadership of the Facilitator  in successfully 
reinvigorating the work under the Work Programme. We have seen sustained efforts to intensify 
evidence -based discussions in the past few months. Significant progress has been made this y ear. 
Given the evolving nature of e -commerce and its impact on bridging digital divide, we see the 
importance to continue discussions on trade -related topics in the Work Programme.  
3.288.   On the moratorium, HKC's position is well known. I would  just like to rais e two red flags. 
First, if the moratorium were to lapse at MC13, this would be seen as a retrogression of the WTO in 
its mission to pursue progressive trade liberalization . This would also run against commercial realities 
and aspirations of the internation al business sector, including MSMEs.  
3.289.   Imagine who would be more vulnerable if the moratorium were to lapse and Members were 
at liberty to levy custom duties on electronic transmission. It would be the MSMEs in developing 
countries and LDCs that would be har d hit, and not the multinational giants in developed countries.  
3.290.   We therefore call on Members to join the growing consensus across the WTO membership 
on extending the moratorium and consider co -sponsoring WT/GC/W/909/Rev.1 . 
3.291.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 36 - 
 
  3.292.   My delegation is encouraged by the ongoing discussions on e -commerce issues in the WTO 
and supports their continuation.  Along with many other WTO Members, we are convinced that 
consideration of one of the most significant e -commerce issues  – duties on electronic transmissions 
– should continue in order to make this issue understandable for all WTO Members.  
3.293.   Meanwhile, we su pport the extension of the moratorium on customs duties on electronic 
transmissions until MC14.  We agree that the work program me on electronic commerce should play 
a key role in establishing the dialogue between Members in order to discuss all challenges a nd 
benefits of e -commerce.  
3.294.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
3.295.   China thanks the Facilitator  for her report and tireless efforts in facilitating the dedicated 
discussions. Under her capable leadership and with Members' proactive e ngagement, China is 
pleased to see the reinvigoration of the Work Program me on E-Commerce.  
3.296.   China appreciates the WTO Secretariat's coordination and hard work on launching the joint 
report on Digital Trade for Development. China recognizes the positive role  that this report will play 
in facilitating Members' further discussions, as it provides a common analytical basis and avoids 
citing different reports with polarized findings.  
3.297.   On the draft Ministerial Decision, our thanks go to the proponents for their res pective 
proposals. China supports a balanced E -commerce outcome at MC13, to help developing Members 
harness opportunities arising from digital economy and respond to the calls of business community. 
To this end, the Ministerial Decision should include the following elements. First, Members should 
intensify post -MC13 work under the Work Program me, especially with a continued focus on its 
development dimension. Second, the moratorium should be extended to MC14. Third, Members 
should further discuss the scope,  definition and impact of the moratorium.  
3.298.   The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
3.299.   We express our gratitude to the Facilitator  for her report and her unwavering dedication to 
supporting our efforts during the focused discussions on E -commerce.  We also extend our 
appreciation to South Africa for the insightful presentation on the submission contained in 
WT/GC/W/ 910 regarding the challenges related to digital industrialization in developing countries. 
Additionally, we acknowledge the draf t ministerial decision in WT/GC/ W/91 1. Our thanks are also 
extended to the proponents of the draft ministerial decision outlined in WT/GC/W /909. We 
acknowledge the ACP Group submission.  
3.300.   Some of the challenges faced by small and developing countries businesses in the digital 
market - as highlighted in the South African submission  - include the unfair advantage th at global 
tech platforms have due to their access to cheap venture capital and global profit streams. These 
challenges, coupled with others, hinder the participation of developing countries in the market, such 
as the insufficient digital infrastructure and  internet access, limited technical expertise and resources 
for businesses and regulatory bodies and more. We will engage with our colleagues from South 
Africa to explore the ideas contained in the submission and see to how to implement the proposed 
remedi al actions in practice.  
3.301.   We firmly believe that the WTO should play a pivotal role in offering effective solutions to 
the challenges faced by developing countries, including the least developed countries (LDCs), as 
they strive to achieve digital industriali zation and increase their global engagement in e -commerce. 
This includes addressing the digital divide both among and within countries.  
3.302.   We seriously consider South Africa's proposed elements in the draft ministerial decision in 
WT/GC/W/ 911, including the e stablishment of a fund designed to support initiatives that address 
the digital divide, enhance technical capacity, and improve visibility and discoverability among 
consumers.  
3.303.   Additionally, we emphasize the importance of continuing the reinvigoration of wo rk under 
the work program me on e-commerce after MC13 as emphasized by Ministers during the recent 
Mini-Ministerial meeting held last Monday.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 37 - 
 
  3.304.   Initiating discussions and fostering constructive engagement on promoting technology 
transfer in developing countr ies and LDCs within the context of e -commerce is crucial to help 
addressing global development challenges.  
3.305.   Conducting E -readiness assessment in individual countries with a particular focus on the 
developmental aspect is imperative, this complements our eff orts to reinvigorate the work program. 
In this regard we highlight the significance of collaborating with other relevant international 
organizations, particularly UNCTAD and ITC, as far as e -readiness assessment is concerned.  
3.306.   Finally, we reiterate that th e moratorium should not be renewed automatically. The 
moratorium should be subject to further analysis concerning its scope and definition. An assessment 
based on a cost -benefit analysis should be conducted for all potential scenarios, including the 
termin ation of the moratorium, its extension, or retention. These analyses should inform our final 
decision.  
3.307.   The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
3.308.   Malaysia views the  dedicated sessions  as very useful . They  have successfully stimulated  
constructive discussions among Members. We would like to express our appreciation to the Facilitator 
for driving these important tasks, as she reflected in her report earlier. We would also like to thank 
Members for their submissions, and Malaysia is cons idering all proposals objectively.  The e -
commerce Work Programme is a good example, where continuous engagements and experience 
sharing could bridge the gaps between Members.  
3.309.   In a long run, we believe such engagement will definitely help us to understand t he unique 
development needs of developing Members – and reduce the digital divide. Additionally, the joint 
reports produced by international organizations  such as IMF, OECD, UNCTAD and World Bank could 
complement  the on -going  evidence -based discussions on e-commerce moratorium at the WTO.  
3.310.   In this regard, based on the available reports and after taking into account the global 
economic scenario, Malaysia sees the need to extend the e -commerce moratorium beyond MC13. 
We believe such decision would contribute to the development of global digital sector, as well as 
provide greater stability and predictability.  
3.311.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
3.312.   I would like to thank Switzerland for introducing the draft Ministerial Decision of 
WT/GC/W/909 , of which we are one of the co -sponsors. We believe that this proposal is a more 
balanced one. It recommends the continuation of the current practice of not imposing customs duties 
on electronic transmissions until the 14th Ministerial Conference. It leaves Members with the 
opportunity to continue periodically reviewing the moratorium. The proposal also upholds the 
development dimension in the Work Program me to help reduce the digital gap among Members. We 
urge Members which are yet to join the initiative to support the proposal.  I also thank South Africa 
for introducing its proposals. However, we would like to raise our concern about the WT/GC/W/911  
regarding the suggestion of terminating the moratorium.  
3.313.   The complex nature of  the global digital ecosystem is obvious in that all stakeholders of the 
e-commerce platforms, the content suppliers and the e -commerce consumers are interconnected. 
Imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions in the whole ecosystem will be invaria bly 
impacted, regardless of their business size. The suggested text in WT/GC/W/911  about terminating 
the moratorium not only gives rise to serious uncertainty to international trade in e -commerce, but 
most importantly, poses immense adverse impacts on relat ed sectors and consumers in all Members, 
particularly those in the more vulnerable Members. It will undermine MSMEs' economic positions 
most seriously. It is because that, given their limited resources to adapt to drastic changes in the 
digital trade envir onment, MSMEs are most vulnerable to any imposition of duties on e -commerce 
transactions on which they heavily rely.  
3.314.   We sincerely hope that WT/GC/W/911  concerning its suggestion on stopping the moratorium 
can be reconsidered. We will engage constructively in the discussion on the concerns raised by its 
proponents.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 38 - 
 
  3.315.   The representative of Ukraine  delivered the following statement:  
3.316.   Ukraine would like to echo thanks to the Facilitator for her tireless and dedicated efforts to 
revitalize the work under the Work P rogramme and for her optimism, constructiveness and 
structured approach. The extension of the e -commerce moratorium, together with the e -commerce 
work programme remains key priority for Ukraine. This is of vital importance for the business 
community in bot h developed and developing countries, and of systemic overall importance to the 
WTO.  
3.317.   We should work together to find a more stable solution for the moratorium and the work 
programme. Ukraine would like to add its voice of support to the document WT/GC/W/909 , which 
we also co -sponsored. We commend the progress accomplished by Members since M C12 and the 
work done under the E -Commerce Work Programme and emphasize the necessity to continue this 
work and dedicated discussions focusing on trade related topics brought forward by Members.  
3.318.   Ukraine remains a strong supporter of the permanent moratoriu m on customs duties on 
electronic transmissions, since we believe the long-standing  practice of application of this 
moratorium has significantly contributed to overall engagement of businesses, particularly MSMEs 
in cross -border e -commerce. We would like t o express our appreciation to the co -sponsors for taking 
initiative and tabling this communication and encourage WTO Members to engage constructively and 
support this multilateral decision.  
3.319.   The representative of India delivered the following statement7: 
3.320.   I would like to thank Ambassador Usha Canabady for her efforts in steering the work 
programme on e -commerce. India has contributed constructively to this process of reinvigoration, 
particularly through our submissions on consumer protection, competition and  digital public 
infrastructure including the international experiences.  
3.321.   We would also like to thank the proponents and the papers submitted in the form of 
WT/GC/ W/909, WT/GC/ W/910 and WT/GC/ W/911, particularly the last two papers from South 
Africa, and we feel disappointed that the proponents of WT/GC/ W/909 have once again taken it for 
granted that without evidence and without explanation, Ministers will be able to take a d ecision by 
simply writing two paragraphs on extension of the moratorium.  
3.322.   The current global landscape of e - commerce is dominated by a few firms based in developed 
countries, and most developing countries are net importers of digital products. Increasing 
participation of developing countries in global e - commerce continues to be a challenge due to the 
digital divide that exists between the developed and the developing countries. At various 
international fora concerns have been expressed about the increasing  influence of big tech firms, 
which is counter to the narrative that we hear in this room. MSMEs face considerable challenges on 
account of anti -competitive business practices of the big tech firms, which had been clearly brought 
out in the South African s ubmission. Very recently we have seen that in one of the judgments  of the 
authorities in a developed country in the discussion around the moratorium, we believe that the 
agenda of big tech, I repeat, that we believe that the agenda of big tech is being pur sued in the garb 
of MSMEs. We have never got information that how much of gain in the demanding countries are 
going to MSMEs and to the big tech firms respectively -that evidence has not been put on table.  
3.323.   Unfortunately, in the last agenda item we heard th e same problem for TRIPS waiver decision 
that we need evidence but, in this case, we take shelter under various reports and the proponents 
fail to bring out specific submissions highlighting what their country or what their industry is gaining 
through these 25 years of moratorium .  
3.324.   In the wake of lack of common understanding amongst the membership on the scope of the 
moratorium, and the significant implications of the moratorium, particularly on developing countries, 
including LDCs, the merit of continuing to maintain this practice needs to be questioned. We have 
not yet seen convincing evidence by the proponents of the moratorium, that its continuation has 
benefited countries particularly developing and LDCs having large population and marketplace. 
 
7 Following the meeting , the delegation of India submitted subsequently their  oral and written statements 
to the Secretariat for inclusion in the record. India's written statements have been included in the Annex, as 
requested.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 39 - 
 
  Customs duties have traditionally been used to confer level playing field to domestic industries and 
also to work on macroeconomic policies for controlling unhindered imported goods influence in case 
of currency crisis. India believes that while digital industrial ization holds the promise for economic 
development and prosperity for the developing countries, including the LDCs all policy tools in the 
toolbox, which includes customs duties are needed to realize its full potential.  
3.325.   India supports reinvigoration of th e work under the work programme of e-commerce, and 
through our submissions we have made efforts to draw attention of the membership to the 
challenges related to consumer trust and anti -competitive practices, role of digital public 
infrastructure approach i n promoting innovation, democratizing technology and fostering 
competitive ecology of digital businesses.  
3.326.   In India, the unified payment interface is enabling more than 10 billion transactions monthly 
which is more than the global population. It has democr atized digital payments at zero cost. Open 
Network for digital commerce enables inclusive e commerce by allowing small sellers to participate 
on equal footing on fair terms without getting extorted by the big tech platforms.  
3.327.   India stands ready to contribu te to global efforts at harnessing to transform essential 
capabilities of e -commerce. Last but not the least, I would like to remind that graduating LDC 
countries had to negotiate very hard for duty free quota free access for the transition period. Let us 
not give this duty -free quota free access to the big tech firms in developed countries for the markets 
of developing countries without any evidence and without any discussion.  
3.328.   The representative of Cambodia  delivered the following statement:  
3.329.   Cambodia align s itself with the statement by the LDC Group  on the challenges  we are facing. 
To being, I want to thank the Secretariat for preparing and circulating the documents. Also, a huge 
thank to the Facilitator  for her leadership and commitment for the report of t he stay of play on the 
Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. We also thank and welcome South Africa, the ACP Group  
for the proposals, and draft Ministerial Decision presented by Switzerland.  
3.330.   Cambodia recognizes the efforts through dedicated discussions to  reinvigorate the 1998 
Work Programme on E -Commerce, including the exchange of good practices, submissions from 
Member States on specific topics.  We welcome and support to have more engagement under the 
Work Programme, focusing mainly on the development di mension for equal level of playing field.  
3.331.   To realize this, we suggest working closely with other international organizations and 
relevant stakeholders to enhance coordination to address the main challenges related to e -commerce 
as well as the need for trai ning and capacity building, technical assistant to the development of 
regulatory framework.  
3.332.   Cambodia support s the current practice of not imposing customs duties on electronic 
transmissions beyond MC13. Finally, we see the value to continue holding further  deliberations and 
collect evidence on the implication of the moratorium, particularly on its possible impacts, while at 
the same time, keep updating the outcomes to the General Council.  We hope to receive positive 
outcomes from the dedicated session in Ja nuary next month on this vital matter.  
3.333.   The representative of Nicaragua  delivered the following statement:  
3.334.   Nicaragua welcomes the report provided by the Facilitator , who has done a commendable 
job of the discussions under this Work Programme.  We also wish t o thank the delegations that have 
recently submitted draft ministerial decisions for the Thirteenth Ministerial Conference.   
3.335.   We welcome the calls for the continuation of work on the basis of our mandate from 1998, 
paying special attention to the development dimension of this Work Programme so that we can 
address the limitations and challenges facing developing Members, such as the digital divide, 
non-discriminatory access to new information and communication technologies and the development 
of infrastructure services for the advancement of the sector.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 40 - 
 
  3.336.   With regard to the non -imposition of customs duties on electronic transmissions, Nicaragua 
hopes that a permanent solution to this issue will be reached in order to maintain certainty and 
predictabili ty for consumers and businesses in the sector.  
3.337.   Given that a permanent agreement is not envisaged, Nicaragua supports the proposals to 
maintain the non -imposition of customs duties on electronic transmissions until the Fourteenth 
Ministerial Conference.  
3.338.   The representative of Israel  delivered the following statement.  
3.339.   Israel welcomes the discussions and progress Members have made this year under the 
leadership of the Facilitator  in advancing the work under the Work Programme on Electronic 
Commerce. It is criti cal for the WTO to be effective in its response to today's challenges and the 
Membership should continue to build on the achievements since MC12 to invigorate the Work 
Programme.  
3.340.   As a co -sponsor of the draft decision, it is Israel's view that it captures both our 
accomplishments this past year and informs our continued work leading up to MC14 on trade -related 
topics of importance to different Members.  
3.341.   The draft decision also calls for the extension of the e -commerce moratorium until MC14. 
Israel believes that it is vital to maintain this practice, of not imposing customs duties on electronic 
transmissions, which is significant for cross -border trade, an d has substantive economic effects on 
all our economies, especially for MSMEs and exporters from remote and peripheral backgrounds.  
3.342.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
3.343.   The European Union welcomes the intensified eng agement we have seen on development - 
and digital trade -related issues since MC12. We are glad to see that the Work Programme has been 
truly reinvigorated, particularly in line with its development dimension.  
3.344.   The Work Programme discussions on the challenges  and opportunities of e -commerce are 
extremely important for developed and developing countries alike.  
3.345.   The extension of the moratorium, along with the e -commerce Work Programme, at MC13 
remains one of the European Union's key objectives. The European Union  notes the clear support 
for the extension expressed at the dedicated sessions of the Work Programme, due to its key 
importance to the development of the digital economy and trade. Evidence shows, and yes, there 
has been evidence presented, showing, among other things, that the benefits largely outweigh 
foregone customs revenue.  
3.346.   The moratorium facilitates access to digital services for businesses and consumers 
worldwide, and in particular MSMEs in developing countries. The moratorium is key to ensuring tha t 
developing countries reap the benefits of the digital economy.  
3.347.   In this context, we welcome the proposal by 23 Members to renew the moratorium until 
MC14 and for a continuation of the discussions in the Work Programme, even if it falls short of our 
objec tive of achieving a more stable solution. We further welcome the proposal for the draft decision 
by the ACP countries and appreciate a number of common elements.  
3.348.   On the other hand, we do not share the proposal by South Africa to terminate the 
moratorium an d thus jeopardize  the transition towards a digital economy for developing 
countries.  The moratorium does not in any way prevent or limit domestic policy space to raise 
revenue by applying non -discriminatory consumption taxes such as VAT or GST or to promo te 
competition in digital markets. These objectives are better achieved in other ways that do not harm 
the productivity and competitiveness of domestic businesses, particularly MSMEs.  
3.349.   I would finally like to thank the Mauritius Ambassador for her efforts in facilitating our Work 
Programme discussions.  
3.350.   The representative of Jamaica  delivered the following statement:  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 41 - 
 
  3.351.   Jamaica aligns with the statements delivered by the  CARICOM and ACP Groups on this 
agenda item.  We thank the Facilitator  for the report and le adership offered for these discussions.  
The Mini-Ministerial held earlier this week signaled  the widespread support for the extension of the 
moratorium whether indefinitely or until MC14. In this regard, we note the various proposals on the 
table, includin g that submitted by the ACP Group.  
3.352.   It was encouraging to note the interventions by other proponents of the possible 
convergences between their draft and the ACP proposal. In that regard, we remain hopeful that, in 
dramatizing Geneva and de -dramatizing Abu  Dhabi, this could be one area for conclusion before 
MC13.  
3.353.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
3.354.   Pakistan would like to thank the Facilitator  for her tireless work to reinvigorate e -commerce 
work programme . We also thank South Africa for their presentation and acknowledge the 
presentation made by Switzerland on behalf of the co -sponsors of WT/GC/W/909 . 
3.355.   On the issue of moratorium, we align ourselves with South Africa , so that marginally digital  
developing Members and LDCs have the policy space to address challenges in raising revenues, 
pursuing digital economy , supporting  local Small & Medium and Women -Owned e -commerce 
players, and regulating the commercial use of private  data. 
3.356.   We firmly hope that all WTO Me mbers can reach a conclusive decision on the termination, 
or at minimum a moratorium on the moratorium on import duties on electronic transmissions at the 
upcoming MC13.  
3.357.   The representative of Kazakhstan  delivered the following statement:  
3.358.   I would like to th ank the Facilitator for her leadership in the discussions. We thank South 
Africa, the ACP Group and Switzerland, on behalf of proponents, for their submissions and 
presentations. Kazakhstan agrees to continue the work under the Work Program me and supports 
the extension of the moratorium until MC14.  
3.359.   The representative of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
3.360.   We also thank the Facilitator for her leadership and report today. We support continuing 
discussions in the Work Programme  on trade -related topic s to allow developing countries and LDCs 
to better engage and benefit from e -commerce and the digital economy. On the e-commerce 
moratorium  for Australia, it is a clear , that there is a  growing consensus among Members  that one 
of the most damaging things a t MC13 could be to let the moratorium lapse. We therefore must see 
it renewed, ideally before the Conference.  
3.361.   The representative of New Zealand  delivered the following statement:  
3.362.   New Zealand also welcomes the reinvigoration of the e -commerce work programme . We 
have found useful  the in-depth  discussions under  the able leadership of the Facilitator . These have 
been very  helpful to date. We see still more work to be done and remain keen to continue to engage  
in these . 
3.363.   At the same time, we see an extension of t he moratorium on customs duties as an essential 
underpinning for the growth and development of e -commerce in all our economies. The mor atorium  
as others said supports stability and predic tability  in e-commerce. It is something  that our 
stakeholders frequently raise as a key priority.  
3.364.   To that end, we are pleased to co -sponsor draft decision WT/GC/W/909 . We also thank the 
ACP Group for its recent paper and proposals, which among other things, highlights  the mor atorium's  
support f or development. We continue to analyze the paper,  but we welcome it and suggestion it 
makes to maintain current practice, while discussions continue.  
3.365.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 42 - 
 
  3.366.   Korea also joins others app reciating the Facilitator  for her leadership and report today. We 
associate with previous intervention made by Switzerland on the draft Ministerial Decision as a 
co-sponsor. Korea is encouraged by our efforts made since MC12, which led to the reinvigoratio n of 
the Work Programme. We are equally encouraged by the strong calls for the extension of the 
Moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions leading up to MC13.  
3.367.   Our discussions, engagements with international organizations, inputs from stakeho lders, 
public forum and the recent joint study by international organizations (the IMF, OECD, UNCTAD, 
World Bank and WTO) have sufficiently and consistently confirmed the importance for all Members 
to maintain the current practice of not imposing customs d uties. The moratorium ensures 
predictability, certainty, and fosters opportunities for e -commerce to grow. Through this, the 
benefits go to all.  
3.368.   Korea urges Members that the decision to renew the moratorium be made in advance of 
MC13.  Korea takes note of proposals by South Africa. While we are open to engage in discussions 
for a concise and meaningful ministerial decision, Korea wishes to emphasize that our suggestion to 
Ministers should contribute to the progress, not regression, of th e multilateral trade system that we 
have collectively promoted so far.  
3.369.   The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement:  
3.370.   I was not going to say anything but seeming I will be the only co -sponsor not to do so, I 
thought I had to. As co -sponsor  of WT/GC/W/909 , Norway supports the continuation of the 
moratorium for customs duties on electronic transmissions , as well as the continuation of the work 
under the work programme . We are happy to see it is gaining traction. We think the continuation 
will increase predictability and we think it will reduce the digital divide, not increase it.  
3.371.   To those that claim that we are trying to do this, i.e., renew the moratorium without 
discussion or presenting evidence, I would say we had hours and hours of discuss ion, we have 
presented evidence, including on how this would benefit developing countries.  
3.372.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
3.373.   We would like to thank the delegations who have expressed support for the draft decision,  
or the elements presented in our joint communication WT/GC/W/909/Rev .1, including on the need 
to extend the moratorium and in particular the co -sponsors.  
3.374.   We have also taken note of the elements of feedback provided today , as well as at the 
meeting of 8 December of the Dedicated Discussion . We will continue to work together with all 
interested Members and groups of Members on amending our proposal to reflect consultations.  
3.375.   Finally, let me underline again the growing body of  studies on the moratorium and their 
conclusion pointing towards benefits outweighing the costs of its laps e which is also the case for 
LDCs and developing countries and MSMEs.  
3.376.   We are looking forward continuing an informed discussion on the moratorium and note 
shared desire to deepen the exchange on scope and impacts.  
3.377.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
3.378.   I would like to thank the various Members who have expressed their support for the position 
we put forward and especially for the paper that we submitted. It did not escape  our mind that the 
broad support came from both proponents and non -proponents alike . We are heartened by the fact 
that there are elements within the paper that provide substance for cross -sharing of experie nce, 
learning and enriching the discussions in the work programme. We will continue to avail ourselves 
to Members and provide as much insights as possible to advance the discussions here.  
3.379.   On the moratorium, it would be also important to look beyond the re venue loss and to start 
to consider some of the substantive positions on how best to support diversification in the digital 
economy  and how to use tariffs for promoting industrial policy objectives. We are open to insights 
from Members, maybe there are exp eriences where it is possible to promote diversification without WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 43 - 
 
  customs duties. W e have not yet seen such evidence, but we are encouraged by the discussion that 
has taken place here today, and we respect the views that Members have expressed. W e will 
continue to think about what we have heard here today.  
3.380.   The representative of Barbados  delivered the following statement:  
3.381.   Barbados joins others in thanking the Facilitator for her stewardship over the past year. It 
is clear that under her guidance we can dutifu lly report to Ministers at MC13, that 1998 Work 
Programme on E -Commerc e has been reinvigorated. We also thank South Africa and Switzerland  for 
their proposals.  
3.382.   From these, and without getting into details, what we have heard during the Dedicated 
Discussion s and from the ACP Group this morning, our work on this file is not yet completed. We 
need to find space for a discussion on what role the WTO can play in delivering on something 
meaningful on the Work Programme . The ACP Group in para graph  6.3 in WT/GC/W/916  has listed a 
number of questions that could be instructive in this regard. We look forward to Members' 
engagement on these.  
3.383.   Our immediate focus must be on a decision  on the Work Programme  and avoidance of 
politiciz ing and entering into polarizing debates on the  Work Programme  and the moratorium . As 
ACP member , we are supportive of the Group's submission . The draft decision put forward hits the 
right spots and we consider it a possible basis for agreement or at least a basis from which we  can 
commence discussions in different configurations.  
3.384.   The d raft decision put forward by the ACP Group should be looked at as an honest attempt 
in providing  bridging  language  given Members ' divergent views , particularly  on moratorium, as well 
as link that  some may make between the work programme  and the moratorium. Barbados is willing 
and ready to engage on the work prog ramme. In closing , we affirm  our alignment  with the 
statements  delivered by the CARICOM and the ACP Group .   
3.385.   The Director -General  delivere d the following statement:   
3.386.   I just wanted to come in to commend the Facilitator for the ha rd work . The debate we 
listened to today, even though there are still some tough positions shows that Members have worked 
really hard under her leadership and have tr ied to listen to each other. Perhaps this will lead us to 
some agreeable solution or compromise - that all can accept. There is a noticeable change in the 
tone and discussion of what is being said.  
3.387.   I wanted to add on top of that, Fiji mentioned the digital  divide and the need for developing 
countries being supported to bridge this divide. I mentioned earlier there is an ongoing programme 
to do that . We started in Africa with the World Bank that wants to invest in developing countries to 
do hardware, and we will work with them on software. We had a meeting. They wanted to start in 
African region. We have asked African countries that wanted to participate to volunteer. We have 
some countries – Kenya, Rwanda, Benin, Cote d'Ivoire , Ghana, Togo, Nigeria and Mauri tius – who 
have all volunteered to be part of this. A s we speak, DDG Zhang is not here,  he is on mission with 
the World  Bank in Rwanda , followed by  Benin and Cote d 'Ivoire, on this work. Sometimes action is 
important. I hope , from where we are in Africa, we can move to Latin America , the Pacific and all 
over the world, if this programme succeeds . So, t here is some hope for developing countries that 
are trying to bridge the d igital divide , and w hatever decision is made they will be able to benefit 
because they will have the appropriate infrastructure when this is done.  
3.388.   The Chairperson  also thanked the Facilitator for the work she has been doing – which is 
noticeable and apprec iated.  
3.389.   The General Council took note  of the report of the Facilitator and of the statements.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 44 - 
 
  B. BUENOS AIRES (MC11), NAIROBI (MC10) AND BALI (MC9) ( G/RO/99 ) 
3.390.   The Chairperson  delivered the following statement8: 
3.391.   I will only focus on areas where there are new developments to report since the previous 
meeting of the General Council and that have not been covered in any way under the previous 
sub-items.  
3.392.   In doing so, I am mindful that some of the matters that we discuss under this item intersect 
with MC12 outcome s – and have already been covered under the previous sub -item. For any areas 
that I do not mention today, my reports on these matters at previous GC meetings under this agenda 
item stand.  
3.393.   Starting with the LDCs services waiver, the day before the December  meeting of the Council 
for Trade in Services, the LDC Group presented a communication on how to implement the mandate 
in paragraph 8 of the MC12 Outcome Document with regard to the services waiver. The submission 
puts forward a number of proposals for act ion by the Secretariat and the Council.  
3.394.   Members reiterated their continued support for the operationalization  of the waiver but 
indicated that they needed more time to review the LDC proposal in detail, including its resource 
implications.  
3.395.   On preferential rules of origin for LDCs, Members took stock of the implementation of the 
Bali and Nairobi Ministerial Decisions in the Committee on Rules of Origin, resulting in a substantive 
report, submitted to the General Council for consideration. It is contained in document G/RO/99 . 
3.396.   While the Committee on Rules of Origin has been submitting annual reports to the 
General  Council, you will notice that this report is longer and more detailed. It reviews the work of 
the Committee in different areas covered by the Ministerial Deci sions and offers some guidance 
concerning the future work of the Committee.  
3.397.   On trade facilitation, the current rate of implementation commitments stands at just over 
77 per cent for the entire WTO membership.  
3.398.   On Aid for Trade, the CTD Chairperson informed  me that the deadline for responses to the 
Aid for Trade Monitoring and Evaluation exercise was extended to 5  January. Let me recall that this 
exercise will help understand the trade and development priorities of developing economies and 
LDCs, donors, Sout h-South partners, and regional economic communities. For all those who have 
not yet sent their responses, you have until 5  January to do so, and I encourage everyone to 
participate in this exercise.  
3.399.   The Director -General  delivered the following statement:  
3.400.   I would like first to provide an update on the ongoing Aid for Trade monitoring and evaluation 
exercise. I discussed this at November's General Council. This exercise is important in understanding 
the trade and development priorities of developing countri es and LDCs – and how they are evolving.  
3.401.   I am pleased to see an active engagement by Members in this year's Aid for Trade monitoring 
exercise. As of now, we have received 61 responses from a diverse range of Members. So far, 44 
responses have come from dev eloping countries, including 20 LDCs, 15 from donors (both bilateral 
and multilateral),  and two from South -South partners. This demonstrates a global interest and 
commitment to the Aid for Trade Initiative.  
3.402.   As you have heard from the GC Chairperson , the de adline to respond has been extended to 
5 January. I would urge Members to use this time to send in responses. The more diverse the 
response, the more comprehensive an understanding of the various  perspectives and challenges 
faced by our Members.  
 
8 The Chairperson's statement was subsequently circulated in document JOB/GC/378 . WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 45 - 
 
  3.403.   The insights gathered from this monitoring and evaluation exercise are valuable. They 
contribute not only to the effectiveness of Aid -for-Trade interventions but also inform the broader 
discussions on trade and development.  
3.404.   Let me now give some further de tails on the organization of the Global Review. I understand 
that Ambassador S ánchez -Fung will launch a call for thematic session proposals in January, with a 
submission deadline at the end of March. Members, Observers and Observer Organizations can 
submit  requests to organize thematic sessions during the Global Review.  
3.405.   This year's theme Global  Review theme will follow the main topic of the biennial work 
programme, that is: "Mainstreaming Trade". I believe that there is  still much that we can do to 
integra te trade perspectives in development, notably in the context of the pivot to sustainability. 
This is of course a theme that resonated at the Trade Pavilion during COP28.  
3.406.   I encourage you to use the Global Review to look at the impact of the Aid for Trade In itiative 
and ensuring that it remains fit for purpose in a rapidly changing trade and development context. 
The Global Review will take place on 26 -28 June, with events likely taking place in the full week of 
24 June 2024. I encourage all Members to mark th is date on their  calendars.  
3.407.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
3.408.   We would like to again remind of the pending decision of Bali and Nairobi , including the 
General Council  Decision of November 2014 on permanent solution to PSH  which remains unfulfilled.  
Our Commerce and Industry Minister  underscored the importance of honouring the past Ministerial 
Decisions during the Virtual  Mini-Ministerial meeting on 28 November 2023. It was further 
underscored by the Ministers of the Members co -sponsoring  JOB/AG/229 .  
3.409.   Preceding the Ministerial meeting, the Agriculture and Food Security session of the Senior 
Officials Meeting held on 22 and 23 October 2023 clearly highlighted the concern and the importance 
given by a large number of Members, especia lly the developing country Members, to the past 
Ministerial Decisions, especially to the mandate provided to the Permanent Solution to the PSH and 
SSM. During the three breakout sessions on Agriculture, 88 Members made interventions, and nearly 
60 Members called for a PS to the PSH at the MC 13.  
3.410.   Food Security , as per the AoA,  is a non -trade concern . As per the Ministerial Mandates of 
Bali and Nairobi, the permanent solution to the PSH was to be achieved on  fast track,  accelerated 
basis in the dedicated sessions  – completely delinked of normal proceedings by CoA SS by MC11 . 
Maybe third time lucky by MC13.   
3.411.   In the past, we noted that the credibility of the Organization will be at risk if it does not 
deliver on the mandat ed issues. Here we are trying to have new decisions, completely forgetting we 
also have a responsibility to implement past decisions.  
3.412.   We had also requested that the compilation of all outstanding decisions of our Ministers be 
brought before the General Co uncil by the Secretariat , so that we are able to track those decisions 
and take necessary actions. This is still desired, and this request is again given through you 
Chairperson to the Secretariat.  
3.413.   It seems the credibility of the Organization, which is on the edge, is not a concern for many 
who continue to stonewall permanent solutions to the PSH. In this regard, we wish to mention two 
points .  
3.414.   First, o ne is the clear message our Senior Official delivered in the SOM. (i) We would like to 
put on record the F acilitator report on agriculture, particularly paragraph 3 thereof. We hope the 
Members who object to achieving the Permanent Solution to PSH as per the mandate realise that 
they are primarily responsible for not achieving any meaningful reforms in agricul ture. The harder 
they resist the permanent solution  to PSH, the longer it will take to initiate the rest of the agriculture 
reforms.   
3.415.   (ii) We also heard a number of delegates speak on the food security decision or package . 
We want to make it very clear that we would not like to have something like in the past Ministerials WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 46 - 
 
  where we have declarations and decisions, but it does not add a single grain to vulnerable 
populations. We should resist talking in the name of transparency or trade facilitation while for getting 
about the concrete measures. W e had two decisions on food in MC12. So far, they have not added 
an additional morsel of grain to the needs of the vulnerable populations and countries. Here we are 
yet again talking about yet another declaration on Fo od Security uninhibited.  
3.416.   (iii) For India, there cannot be a decision on Food Security without a permanent solution to 
the PSH. Hence, we have suggested starting with JOB/AG/229  on a permanent solution for public 
stockholding, a joint proposal of three large groups accounting for more than 80 Members.  
3.417.   (iv) Some Members have said that PSH is one of the solutions to ensure food security and is 
not the only solution. We agree. In t his regard, we have two points to mention.  
3.418.   One, we never said it was the only solution. We have also acknowledged some other views 
that state free trade can also play some role in rendering food security, though its impact is minimal. 
The FAO reports have clearly shown that only 17  per cent  of the world's food is traded across borders. 
Further, during the pandemic time, free trade in agriculture or the so -called agriculture -producing 
countries failed to rise to the occasion when required. So, a ccording to us, the argument that free 
trade ensures food security fell flat and square on its face during the past COVID -19 pandemic. On 
the other hand, the PSH programme of India remained resilient and provided for 800 million people 
for more than 18 mon ths.  
3.419.   Second, food security is a non -trade issue, and WTO, with its limited reach of 17  per cent , 
cannot provide a solution to the global food security needs. Hence, it is only prudent that Members 
recognize this reality and let the permanent solution  to PSH be delivered at the MC13; that is the 
only way to make progress in the otherwise stalemated Agriculture negotiations in the WTO.  
3.420.   The representative of Djibouti , on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
3.421.   We would like to draw attenti on to the instructions given by Ministers in paragraph 8 of the 
MC12 Outcome Document to report at the next session on specific work on these topics of interest 
to LDCs: waiver on services, rules of origin and duty -free and quota -free market access.  
3.422.   The LD C Group has contributed submissions to the CTS and the CRO with elements for 
reporting to Ministers. The CTD should also send its report on the annual review. In the case of the 
CTS, we introduced the contribution last week with recommendations for MC13. W e will also submit 
our proposal in your process on the outcome document , Chairperson , as we did last year for the 
MC12 Outcome Document in paragraph 8.  
3.423.   We urge these bodies to step up to report to Ministers, in accordance with the mandates 
given in Paragr aph 8 of the MC12 Outcome Document.  In conclusion, we request that paragraph 8 
of the MC12 Outcome Document be regularly reflected under the agenda item on follow -up to 
outcomes of the Ministerial Conferences.  
3.424.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the f ollowing statement:  
3.425.   I will be brief and limit my response to simply stating that my delegation expects the 
implementation of all Ministerial mandates, as well as the international legal obligations under 
Article  20 of the Agreement on Agriculture. Under th is Article, all Members have committed to the 
substantial and progressive reduction of distortion and protection in trade in agricultural products. 
The negotiating process, which began in 2000 and was incorporated as a central component of the 
Doha Round i n 2001, should have been concluded in January 2005.  
3.426.   We understand the frustration of some Members, who are impatient to conclude mandates 
that should have been fulfilled in 2017. At the same time, we hope that they can understand the 
frustration and impat ience of delegations like ours that have been waiting for the conclusion of 
mandates that were supposed to be completed not six, but 18 years ago. We hope that we can all 
work together with steadfast political determination to concurrently fulfil all these  mandates through 
holistic and targeted reform.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 47 - 
 
  3.427.   The representative of Indonesia  provided the following statement9:  
3.428.   My delegation continues to regret lack of progress in resolving outstanding mandates from 
previous Ministerial Conferences – including to agree on a permanent solution on PSH for food 
security purposes.  All Ministerial mandates must be respected. This is key to restoring trust that is 
severely lacking in agriculture trade negotiation – and preserving the integrity of the Ministe rial 
Conference.  Agreeing on a permanent solution is even more important now at the time of food crisis 
– and we need a PSH that cover all future programmes for food security purposes.  
3.429.   The G33, the African Group , and the ACP have put together a comprehensi ve joint proposal 
JOB/AG/229  – which we believe constitute a solid basis for a text -based negotiation on PSH for food 
security purposes.  We categorically reject attempts to frame the discussion on PSH for food security 
purposes exclusively within the confine of domestic subsidies. They are not only misguided, but also 
demonstrate total disregard for food security challenges faced by developing country members, 
including LDCs.  
3.430.   Now, on fisheries subsidies. We appreciate the efforts to put the CBDR principle in p ractice 
through the two -tier approach, as the Chair stated in his report at the TNC meeting.  However, it is 
important that we agree on the parameter first . Second, it is important to tighten the discipline for 
those in the stricter tier, not just by way of  adding notification obligation, but also through additional 
responsibility to change the status quo. Reducing the capacity of large-scale fishing vessels and/or 
distant water fishing vessels is one example.  On the SDT, it is unfortunate that the objective  for this 
discipline is to ensure that the less members that can access the flexibility under the provision, the 
better. That is not what effective and appropriate SDT is.  
3.431.   Indonesia's position is well known in that SDT should not come with a geographical l imitation, 
transition period or de minimis . However, we do understand that developing Members and LDCS are 
not a monolith. We all have different situations that informs our needs and interests.  Thus, the SDT 
provisions should be able to capture these inter ests to provide us with necessary policy space to 
develop our fishing sectors in a sustainable manner.  
3.432.   On DS reform , in terms of substance, Indonesia's first and foremost interest is the revival 
of two -tier dispute settlement system. And having heard some Members stating that it might not 
return to provide security and predictability to the multilateral trading system, is concerning, to say 
the least.  We are also concerned that while Members' due process rights are further limited, there 
is an ongoing effor t to provide unlimited transparency to the general public on the ongoing disputes 
that may interfere with the cases and jeopardize disputing Members with the limited capacity.  
3.433.   In terms of process, Indonesia relentlessly asks for the discussion to be formal ized to keep 
the capital abreast on the fast pace of the negotiation as well as to ease the burden of small 
delegations, like Indonesia.  However, where request to have interpretation service is provided, the 
same request to have an online presence of capit al delegation due to clashing schedule is continued 
being denied, without offering any solution.  Instead, we are asked in return to request the other 
formal negotiating body to change their schedule, because, and I quote "we have decided the date 
earlier".  If there is a "good will", there will be a "good way". And this, is not the way.  
3.434.   The General Council took note  of the Chairperson's  report, the  statement of the 
Director -General and the statements made.  
4  WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRPERSON OF THE 
DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT 
(WT/COMTD/SE/12 ) 
4.1.  The Chairperson  noted that i n accordance with the agreement in the General Council in 2002, 
the Work Programme on Small Economies was a standing item on the agenda and the Committee 
on Trade and Development report ed regularly on the progress of work in its Dedicated Sessions.  
She recalled that, a t MC12, Ministers had reaffirmed their commitment to the Work Programme and 
instructed the CTD to continue its wor k in Dedicated Sessions under the overall responsibility of the 
 
9 The statement was not delivered at the meeting but subsequently sent to the Secretariat for inclusion 
in the record.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 48 - 
 
  General Council. She then invited  Ambassador José Sánchez -Fung of the Dominican Republic, 
Chairperson of the CTD, to take the floor to provide the General Council  with an update of the 
ongoing  work in the Committee.  
4.2.  Ambassador José Sánchez -Fung (Dominican Republic), Chairperson of the Committee on Trade 
and Development , delivered the following statement:  
4.3.  I am pleased to introduce the report of the CTD's Dedicated Session on Small Economies to 
the General Council, which is contained in document WT/COMTD/SE/12 . It has been prepared in line 
with the established practice for the Dedicated Session to submit a written report to the General 
Council in the lead -up to a WTO Ministerial Conference.  
4.4.  In addition to an introductory part, the report has two main sections. The first of these sections, 
titled "Submissions and Proceedings", provides an overview of the work undertaken in the Dedicated 
Session since the last Ministerial Conference – MC12 – held in June 2022.  
4.5.  To briefly summarize the content of this section, let me say that three formal meetings of the 
CTD in Dedicated Session have been held since MC12.  
4.6.  In line with the instructions given by Ministers in the MC12 Ministerial Decision on the Work 
Programme on S mall Economies, the first two of these meetings focused on the topic of "integrating 
small economies into the post COVID -19 economy: effects of the pandemic, challenges and 
opportunities".  
4.7.  At the meeting held on 30 March 2023, discussions took place on th e basis of a background 
note prepared by the Secretariat on this topic. At the subsequent meeting held on 19 October, 
discussions focused on the challenges and opportunities for small economies in the post COVID -19 
recovery phase. Presentations were made b y the Commonwealth Secretariat, the South Centre, the 
United Nations Conference on Trade and Development and the World Bank. Presentations were also 
made by three members of the SVE Group: Ecuador, El Salvador and Sri Lanka.  
4.8.  At the most recent meeting of t he Dedicated Session, discussions took place on 16 November, 
and at a reconvened meeting on 24 November, on proposed texts submitted by Guatemala on behalf 
of the SVE Group for a Ministerial Decision at MC13 on the Work Programme on Small Economies.  
4.9.  I am pleased to inform you that, at a further reconvened meeting on the 1st of December, the 
Dedicated Session agreed to the proposed text contained in document WT/COMTD/SE/W/46/Rev.2 .  
4.10.   In line with past practice, the Dedicated Session also  agreed to reflect this text in the other 
main section of the report – the section titled "Future Work" – in the form of recommendations or 
proposals to the General Council.  
4.11.   These include, inter alia , the proposal that the General Council recommend to the  Thirteenth 
Ministerial Conference that Ministers reaffirm their commitment to the Work Programme on Small 
Economies and take note of all the work conducted to date; and that, through cooperation with 
relevant international organizations, work be undertake n specifically on the following three issues:  
− Challenges and opportunities for small economies in using e -commerce and digital 
ecosystem to drive competitiveness;  
− Addressing the importance of resilient, accessible, open, reliable and transparent supply 
chains for small economies given food security issues, and the impact of non -tariff measures 
on trade costs; and  
 
− Exploring with other relevant WTO bodies how to integrate trade -related climate change 
adaptation and mitigation policies into the trade policie s of small economies.  
 
4.12.   The CTD in Dedicated Session would continue monitoring the progress of the small economy 
proposals in WTO bodies and in negotiating groups with the aim of providing responses, as soon as 
possible, to the trade -related issues identifi ed for the fuller integration of SVEs in the multilateral 
trading system, as well as assessing the effectiveness of the responses framed so far to integrate 
the SVEs in the multilateral trading system.   WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 49 - 
 
  4.13.   In short, the recommendation of the CTD's Dedicated S ession on Small Economies to the 
General Council is that the proposed text for a Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on Small 
Economies, as contained in document WT/COMTD/SE/W/46/Rev.2 , be transmitted to Ministers for 
adoption at MC13.  
4.14.   The representative of Guatemala , on behalf of the SVEs , delivered the following statement:  
4.15.   On behalf of the SVE Group, the Small Economies Group would like to thank the Chairman of 
the Committee on Trade and Development, for his report on  the progress of the work of our 
Dedicated Sessions.  As a follow -up to our report at the last General Council, we would like to report 
that the Members worked on a proposal for a Ministerial decision for MC13 and after much 
deliberation, I am pleased to re port that consensus was reached on this proposal.  
4.16.   The proposal consists of continuing the work on the recommendations that were made in the 
instruction derived from MC12 on how to integrate small economies into the global economy post 
COVID -19. In this reg ard, the areas of work that were agreed upon were: Challenges and 
opportunities for small economies in using e -commerce and digital ecosystem to drive 
competitiveness; Addressing the importance of resilient, accessible, open, reliable and transparent 
suppl y chains for small economies given food security issues, and the impact of non -tariff measures 
on trade costs; Exploring with other relevant WTO bodies how to integrate trade related climate 
change adaptation and mitigation policies into the trade policies  of small economies.  
4.17.   Finally, we would like to thank the other Members who supported the discussion of this 
proposal and who continue to support the work of small economies.  
4.18.   The representative of Barbados , on behalf of CARICOM , delivered the following stat ement:  
4.19.   We thank the Chair for his report and align with the statement from the SVEs. We thank all 
Members for their constructive engagement around landing a Ministerial decision on small economies 
that recognizes work undertaken and  lays the groundwork for  some concrete areas for discussion 
between MC13 and MC14 . 
4.20.   There are three  key elements in the Ministerial decision that reflects the priorities of SVEs . 
These are areas that are key to helping us to grow through trade and better use trade rules and 
trade policies to address the impacts of the polycrises which affect the most vulnerable the hardest.  
4.21.   A key part of delivering on our mandate is to work with other relevant international 
organizations  and actors , including the private sector , to help us better a ddress our trade related 
constraints. Going forward we also want to better use the platform of the CTD to ignite and engender 
concrete proposals and interactions in other parts of the house. We are keen to work with our 
partners in WTO to continue to add v alue to the discussions in the dedicated session in a tangible 
way. Again , we thank all Members for continuing to support the priorities of SVEs.  
4.22.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
4.23.   The African  Group would like to thank the CTD Chair for his leadership and his report. In line 
with the MC12 Ministerial mandate for small economies, Members agreed to a work programme to 
frame responses to the trade -related issues identified for the fuller integrati on of SVEs into the 
multilateral trading system. We recognize , however, that more work is still needed to address the 
specific challenges and needs of small economies towards more tangible outcomes.  
4.24.   This Ministerial decision is important with the view of a ddressing specific challenges and 
opportunities as identified in the Decision where digital competitiveness is key. In addition, 
resilience, and reliable supply chains given food security, trade costs and partnerships towards 
addressing climate change, foo d security, and mitigation form a key role for the small economies 
moving forward.  
4.25.   On this note the African Group concurs with the CTD Chair report and supports the adoption 
of the draft Ministerial decision for the Extension of the Work Programme on Small Economies for 
the consideration of our Ministers at MC13.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 50 - 
 
  4.26.   The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of OECS , delivered the following 
statement:  
4.27.   At the outset, the OECS aligns with the statements by the  CARICOM, the ACP Group and the 
SVEs Group. We also thank the  CTD Chair for his comprehensive report , as well as for his effective 
stewardship of the work of this important Body. The OECS is supportive of the draft Ministerial 
Decision emanating from the last Dedicated Session on Small Economies. This draft Decision 
contains the elements of a Work Program me of interest to us as SVEs. We also commend Members 
for the generally constructive nature of the engagement on this draft Decision.  
4.28.   The representative of Maldives  delivered the following statement:  
4.29.   We express gratitude for the comprehensive update by the  CTD Chair. We extend appreciation 
to Guatemala for the work on the Ministerial decision proposal, which was adopted by consensus at 
CTD meeting in December. Considerable number of nations fall within small economies, they make 
substantial contributions to  GDP. They face special vulnerabilities which require special emphasis.  
4.30.   The representative of Sri Lanka  delivered the following statement:  
4.31.   My delegation wishes to extend our appreciation to the CTD Chairperson  for its report on 
Small Economies.  Despite re peated emphasis on our commitment to the Work Programme on Small 
Economies to adopt specific measures that would facilitate the fuller integration of SVEs into the 
multilateral trading system, as indicated in the Secretariat report ( WT/COMTD/SE/W/45 ), SVEs 
participation in global merchandise trade has increased mere 0.05% from 2010 to 2019.  
4.32.   Therefore, there is a need for further work in order to fully achieve the mandate of the Doha 
Ministerial Declaration as indicated in the Chair's report.  As highlighted at many forums, SVEs are 
diverse and dynamic on their own problems as well as solutions which could possibly go beyond the 
scope of the WTO. Therefore, external collaborations are very important, as indicated under the 
draft declaration.  
4.33.   The d raft declaration emphasizes the area of e -commerce and digital ecosystem, transparent 
supply chains for food security issues, trade costs, and last but not least how to integrate climate 
change adaptation and mitigation policies into the trade policies of SVE s. These are the areas, where 
wider WTO membership is deliberated upon, where SVEs should also benefit from these multilateral 
processes.  
4.34.   The representative of Samoa , on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following statement:  
4.35.   The ACP Group thanks  the CTD Chairperson  for his leadership and his report.  In line with the 
MC12 Ministerial mandate for small economies, Members agreed to a work programme to frame 
responses to the trade -related issues identified for the fuller integration of SVEs into the multil ateral 
trading system. The MC12 decision resulted in a Secretariat factual analysis which underscores the 
vulnerability and the unique needs of SVE members thus the need for targeted support. We 
recogni ze, however, that more work is still needed to address  the specific challenges and needs of 
small economies towards more tangible outcomes.  
4.36.   In this regard, we thank Guatemala for its leadership which culminated in the draft outcomes 
document for a Ministerial Decision seeking an extension of the Work Programm e for Small 
Economie s as adopted by consensus at the December CTD meeting.  
4.37.   As Members would be aware, the ACP Group includes numerous members from small 
economies . This Ministerial decision is critical with the view of addressing specific challenges and 
opportunities as identified in the decision where digital competitiveness is key. In addition, resilience, 
and reliable supply chains given food security, trade costs and partnerships towards addressing 
climate change and mitigation form a key role for the small economies moving forward.  With this, 
we recogni ze the role of the Secretariat which greatly assisted in delivering the outcomes of MC12 
through the factual analysis that provides a useful basis for our work.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 51 - 
 
  4.38.   On this note the ACP Group concurs wit h the CTD Chairs report and supports the adoption of 
the draft Ministerial Decision for the Extension of the Work Programme on Small Economies for the 
consideration of our Ministers at MC13.  
4.39.   The representative of Fiji, on behalf of the Pacific Group , deliv ered the following statement:  
4.40.   The Pacific Group thanks the CTD Chair  for his report and for his leadership. Our Group also 
supports the SVEs statement and align with ACP Group s tatement.  SVEs have structural 
vulnerabilities owing to their smallness, isolat ion and limited capacities that result in high trade costs 
and thereby make them uncompetitive in world markets. These are compounded by the impact of 
climate change. We therefore commend the work undertaken in the Dedicated Session including 
experience sh aring to address the trade challenges of SVEs and also to identify opportunities to 
address these challenges.  
4.41.   The Pacific Group supports the draft Decision at MC13 to extend the Work Programme on 
Small Economies. In particular, to continue the work on iden tifying opportunities and addressing the 
challenges to digitalization  in SVEs, ensuring access to reliable and transparent supply chains 
including for food security and reducing non -tariff barriers to reduce trade costs; and exploring how 
to integrate trad e-related climate change adaption and mitigation into the trade policies of small 
economies.  We therefore urge Members to support this work going forward, which must deliver on 
the mandate, that is, to frame responses to the trade challenges faced by small  vulnerable 
economies.  
4.42.   On behalf of Fiji, I wish to align Fiji's statement with the ACP Group statement and the Pacific 
Group statement.  We commend the CTD Chair for his tremendous efforts leading this development 
file and for his progressive report. We a lso recognize and commend Guatemala for its leadership, in 
the recent draft outcomes document to be presented for the consideration of our Ministers.  The draft 
outcome in fact underscores the aspirations of small economies, many of whom are in the Pacific 
Region. The extension of the Work Program me takes into consideration specific key areas where 
tangible outcomes could be sought such as in the digital ecosystem, supply chain and trade and 
climate change policies.  
4.43.   The draft Ministerial Decision adopted at the 1 December CTD Session for Small Economies, 
would not have been possible without the support of all Members. It is equally encouraging to hear 
Ministers in the Mini-Ministerial this week making reference to the outcome.  We look forward to the 
adoption  of this draft Ministerial Decision for Small Economies in this General Council to be presented 
for the consideration of our Ministers in Abu Dhabi.  
4.44.   The representative of Trinidad and Tobago  delivered the following statement:  
4.45.   We align with CARICOM, ACP and  SVE Group statements. We thank the CTD Chair for his 
report and commend him for his able stewardship. We also recognize the dedication and persistence 
of Guatemala, especially in relation to our work on outlining a suitable and acceptable draft 
Ministeria l declaration, which reflects a number of issues of importance to our delegations as small 
economies, including non -tariff measures. We thank Members for their constructive engagement.  
4.46.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statem ent: 
4.47.   The United Kingdom  welcomes the work that the Dedicated Session on Small Economies has 
taken forward throughout this year and thanks the chair for his leadership and support. We are 
pleased to have agreed language on a draft Ministerial Decision ahead of MC13. This will com mit us 
to work on future digital trade, resilient supply chains especially around food security and climate 
change adaptation and mitigation. All of this will be necessary if we are going to be able to support 
the most vulnerable countries going forward.   
4.48.   Finally, whilst I have the floor, I wanted to quickly update Members to say that today the UK's 
Minister for Development deposited the UK's instrument of acceptance to the WTO's Fisheries 
Agreement and formally ratified the treaty, and I am particularly pl eased to say that we have pledged 
to contribute up to GBP 1 million towards the Fish Fund, so we are very pleased to see the UK's flag 
in the map in the atrium and we are very much committed to intensifying the negotiations on phase  2 
when we get started in the New Year.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 52 - 
 
  4.49.   The representative of Mauritius  delivered the following statement:  
4.50.   Turning to Small Economies Chair, I thank the CTD Chair for his continued efforts to advance 
the issue of Small Economies.  I also thank Guatemala for introducing th is document on behalf of the 
SVEs and to which Mauritius fully subscribes.  We recall that earlier this year, the Secretariat 
produced a very valuable document on the situation of small economies which made a significant 
difference by giving direction to th e discussions. I thank the Secretariat for this.  
4.51.   The decision on small economies  dates  far back to 1998, some 25 years ago and since then , 
many new challenges have arisen  for small economies . We look forward to the adoption of this 
decision by the General Council and its referral to MC13 with the hope that we can have more 
concrete decisions for small economies by MC14.  
4.52.   The representative of El Salvador  delivered the following statement:  
4.53.   We would like to join others in thanking the CTD Chair for his tireles s work in advancing the 
work of the Committee's dedicated sessions, including the Work Programme on Small Economies.  
We also wish to thank the delegation of Guatemala for its leadership as group coordinator, and 
endorse the statement made by Ambassador Pé rez. We very much welcome the consensus reached 
on the Work Programme's ministerial decision, which has taken into account discussion on areas of 
the utmost importance to small economies, such as e -commerce and digitalization, and supply chains 
for small e conomies in the light of food security challenges. We believe that, through this important 
decision, Ministers are renewing their commitment to ensuring that all Members work towards the 
fuller integration of small economies into world trade.  
4.54.   This space f or dedicated discussion on advancing the Work Programme on Small Economies 
provides a forum in which all Members are made aware of not only the challenges faced by these 
Members as a result of the COVID -19 pandemic and other crises, but also the opportunit ies and 
ways in which the WTO can help to promote further integration into trade.  We hope that future 
discussions will be of benefit to the entire membership.  
4.55.   The representative of Honduras  delivered the following statement:  
4.56.   I would also like to thank the  Chair of the CTD for the efforts made, as well as Guatemala for 
its leadership of the small economies group. Thank you to all Members for this decision, which we 
are submitting to the General Council with a view to the Ministerial Conference. As our colle agues 
from other small economies have said, we should always bear in mind that our economies, being 
vulnerable, face different situations, which need to be taken into consideration in any negotiations 
that take place or situation that arises in this Organi zation in the future.  
4.57.   We would once again like to express our appreciation for the support of all those who have 
generously contributed to the Fisheries Fund, and once more invite all our colleagues to ensure that 
this agreement is approved by their respe ctive legislatures.  
4.58.   The Chairperson  said that a s heard in the CTD Chairperson's report, the Dedicated Session 
agreed to forward the draft decision contained in document WT/COMTD/SE/W/46/Rev.2  to the 
General Council for transmission to  the Ministerial Conference. She noted that this was also  reflected 
in the report before the General Council contained in WT/COMTD/SE/12 , and she welcomed  this 
positive result.  
4.59.   The General Council agreed  to forward the draft decision to the Thirteenth Ministerial 
Conference for adoption by Ministers  and took note  of the report in WT/COMTD/SE/12 , and of the 
statements.  
5  THE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE ASPECTS OF COTTON - PERIODIC REPORT BY THE 
DIRECTOR -GENERAL ( WT/GC/260  – WT/CFMC/DG/10  – WT/MIN(24)/1 ) 
5.1.  The Chairperson  said that i n 2004, the General Council  had instructed the Secretariat to 
continue to work with the development community and to provide the Council with periodic reports 
on the development assistance aspects of the Cotton Initiat ive. The Council had also instructed the 
Director -General to consult with the relevant international organizations, including the Bretton WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 53 - 
 
  Woods Institutions, the FAO and the ITC, to direct effectively existing programmes and any 
additional resources toward s development of the economies where cotton has vital importance.  She 
further noted that t he Bali and Nairobi Decisions reaffirmed this mandate and invited the 
Director -General to continue to provide periodic reports.  
5.2.  The Director -General  delivered the f ollowing statement:  
5.3.  I am pleased to introduce the Tenth Periodic Report on the Development Assistance aspects of 
Cotton, which was circulated on 30 November 2023 in document WT/GC/260 .  
5.4.  Cotton is a critical issue to some of the most vulnerable and marginalized  people of the world 
- For the WTO it is vital and delivering on it is long overdue.  
5.5.  On cotton development assistance, I am pleased to observe that, since the last Periodic Report 
in June 2022 and thanks to the dynamism of the C -4 and the positive respons e by the development 
community, we have made some remarkable progress.  
5.6.  Allow me to share some tangible progress since my last report. Firstly, we organized a 
successful Partners' Conference in July 2022 – we were pleased to witness a high level of interest  
and participation and, importantly, commitment from key partners. We contributed to the 2022 and 
2023 editions of World Cotton Day celebrations – the commemoration of the day helped to shine a 
light on the important of cotton to the lives and livelihoods of millions of people across the global 
and importantly, those who have been adversely impacted by market distortions and pest and 
infestation.  
5.7.  Secondly, we started an innovative and action -oriented partnership with FIFA, specifically to 
support value add ition activities in the C -4 and their partner countries as well as to drive value chain 
development by connecting existing supply with programmes such as football for schools, a 
FIFA/UNESCO support initiative. This project is already yielding some results which I will come back 
to a bit later.  
5.8.  Overall, the trend for cotton development cooperation activities, as recorded in the 10th 
Periodic Report, is positive in terms of cotton -specific commitments.  
5.9.  In this connection, I would like to commend all the Mem bers who have provided updates for 
the latest three revisions of the table, namely: Brazil, Canada, the European Union, France, Italy, 
Japan, Netherlands, and Thailand.  
5.10.   I would also like to highlight the important role played by other international organiz ations 
that actively collaborate with the WTO with regard to our cotton development assistance mandate, 
including: Afreximbank, the Common Fund for Commodities (CFC), the United Nations Food and 
Agriculture Organization (FAO), the International Cotton Advi sory Committee (ICAC), the 
International Trade Centre (ITC), the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development 
(UNCTAD), the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO).  
5.11.   Besides recalling here these important contributions, I would lik e to say a few words on the 
observance of World Cotton Day 2023, were I participated in -person, as well as on our MoU with 
FIFA, under the relevant cotton chapter.  
5.12.   From my experience at World Cotton Day (WCD) 2023 celebrations in Vienna, it is evident 
that World Cotton Day has established itself as a booster for action in support of the cotton sector, 
in particular in the C -4, LDCs and other developing countries where cotton is of vital importance for 
the livelihoods of so many people.  
5.13.   Discussio ns with Ministers and Heads of international organizations  again confirmed the 
urgency attached to find a solution to the long -standing issue of the harmful effects linked to 
distorted cotton markets, and the role that government support plays in this scen ario. 
5.14.   This is made even more urgent by the parallel effects of other factors at play, including:  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 54 - 
 
  5.15.   Overall high price volatility, with a mid -term price outlook that does not appear to be 
particularly encouraging10. 
5.16.   The incidence of pests and other issues th at have heavily affected production and exports in 
the C -4, Côte d'Ivoire and other countries, particularly in Western and Central Africa11.  
5.17.   On the positive side, there is also a genuine intention by the C -4 and their partner countries 
to invest in sustai nable local processing and other value addition activities. Let me be clear, all of 
these efforts are about delivering for people -people that are far too often left behind. It is about 
doing our part to create decent jobs particularly for the youth and wom en, it is about ensuring the 
economic conditions in cotton producing countries are sufficiently attractive that it helps mitigate 
the phenomenon of illegal migration and the tragedies that far too often follow.  
5.18.   I believe this approach by the C -4 and their  partner countries is to be strongly supported by 
members and institutional actors, but also needs the involvement of a broader spectrum of players, 
including in particular private sector investors.  
5.19.   This is why I took the initiative, back in September 202 2, to enter into an inclusive and 
dynamic partnership with FIFA, with an MoU that contains a joint engagement to support cotton 
value addition activities in the C -4 and their partner countries.  
5.20.   A partnership that has attracted the interest of several acto rs, including Afreximbank, who 
matched FIFA's financial support for the conduct of background analytical work under the MoU, but 
also Better Cotton, ITC and UNIDO, as well as key private sector players. And following on from the 
last World Cotton both the International Atomic Energy Agency and International Cotton Advisory 
Centre (ICAC) have requested to join the initiative.  
5.21.   The objective of integrating cotton from the C -4 and their partner countries into national and 
continental apparel supply chains link ed to football is at the core of this endeavor . Of course, we 
hope that this will be a catalyst for demand and hope that production and supply of textiles from the 
C-4 will ultimately go beyond this specific value chain.  
5.22.   We also believe this can help shine a light on the opportunities for the C -4. Take for example, 
this year's instalment of WCD brought in the private sector from near and far, interested in exploring 
how they can partic ipate in the potential of the West African and continental value cha in in cotton.  
5.23.   Connecting C -4 cotton to this 270 billion USD industry would make a material difference to 
the lives of millions of people in the C -4 and beyond. I understand that steps are already being taken 
in this direction, first through the football f or schools programme and hopefully before too long other 
 
10 The international reference price of cotton (as measured by the Cotlook A -Index) initially fell from 
29 January to 1 April 1 when the Co tlook A Index fell by 22.5  per cent . This price fall was a direct result of the 
uncertainty caused by COVID -19. 
 Price then stabilized starting 1 April 2020 and remained stable with only a slight upward trend for the 
continuation of the 2019/20 season. How ever, that slight upward trend continued well into the 2020/21 season 
and did not relent through the 21/22 crop year. The price of cotton reached a ten year high, only surpassed by 
the prices of the 2010/11 season.  
 All of the price volatility and the dram atic rise in prices post -pandemic are related to several factors. 
Cotton lint orders from merchants, after lockdowns were lifted and were increasing rapidly. Consumer demand 
was high. However, logistical complications with shipping and transportation were becoming a significant issue 
and despite the high orders for cotton lint, spinning mills were having a difficult time obtaining shipments on 
time or at all. This confusion injected volatility and concern into the pricing mechanism where some speculators 
were taking advantage. This resulted in rapidly increasing prices until May 5, 2022.  As of then, the price started 
to fall and t he price forecast of the  current  season -average A index for 2023/24 ranges from 72.33 cents to 
104.12 cents, with a midpoint at 86 .23 cents per pound . 
11 Fyi: World cotton trade has not done well in the 2022/23 season and is around 17  per cent  lower than 
the previous season – majorly because of poor consumption. Consumption is negatively affected by poor 
purchasing sentiment in consum ers due to inflation, mass layoffs in certain regions, poor world economic scenario 
etc. Consumption capacity was impacted in consumer countries – e.g., China consumed less due overall economic 
slowdown, Turkey faced earthquakes, Pakistan faced financial c rises with difficulty in paying for cotton imports, 
Bangladesh also faced issues with opening of letters of credit etc. All the above are major trade partners for west 
African exports. This is the impact on the demand for their exports. On the production f ront as well, all the C -4 
countries produced less than the 2021/22 season therefore they had less to export in 2022/2023.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 55 - 
 
  categories of actors within this value chain can benefit from supply from high quality production 
from C -4.  
5.24.   However, to convert this potential into reality, we need to mobilize investments and 
strengthen the technical assistance countries receive.  
5.25.   We also urgently need to support the concrete efforts these countries are making to establish 
a stable and sustainable business environment at the national and regional levels.  
5.26.   To that end, the sustained e ngagement and cooperation of providers of development 
assistance for cotton, beneficiaries, and partner organizations in the WTO Consultative Framework 
Mechanism on Cotton is very encouraging.  
5.27.   It stands as a positive example as we work to consolidate the development dimension of the 
multilateral trading system.  
5.28.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
5.29.   The African Group would like to thank you for including this important item on the agenda 
and expre ss its support for the interventions by the C -4 and Côte d'Ivoire.  Cotton farming provides 
a living for tens of  millions of people around the world. Cotton and its by -products are essential to 
the economies of over 150 countries involved in producing, proc essing, importing and/or exporting 
cotton. More specifically, in Africa and particularly for the four co -sponsors of the Sectoral Initiative 
on Cotton (C -4), cotton plays a key role in the daily lives of the inhabitants of cotton -growing basins, 
estimated at more than 20  million people, who derive the bulk of their income directly or indirectly 
from cotton. There is no doubt that, for these countries, it remains a strategic, vital crop that 
contributes significantly to agricultural production, the economy, trade and employment and 
provides indisputable leverage in the fight against poverty, particularly in rural areas.  
5.30.   Cotton trade negotiations have not thus far produced results, despite the many proposals 
made by the C -4. We believe that MC13 should send a strong signal in terms of the perspectives on 
cotton at the WTO. The African Group supports the draft decision submitted by the C -4 and Côte 
d'Ivoire, which seeks to secure a consensual outcome by MC13. Pending the necessary desired 
developments in terms o f trade negotiation outcomes, the African Group would like to call on bilateral 
and multilateral partners to support the development of cotton farming in Africa in order to 
contribute not only to structural solutions to constraints that hinder the competit iveness of the 
African cotton sector, but also to yield improvement and the local processing of cotton and its 
by-products.  
5.31.   In view of this, the African Group would like to stress that it is crucial to develop the cotton 
value chain and manage the various segments thereof. These actions constitute the purpose of the 
various projects submitted by several cotton -producing African countries, which are eagerly awaiting 
the necessary funding. They also constitute the purpose of the C -4 draft decision in its deve lopment 
component, which calls on WTO Members to reaffirm previous decisions on cotton and the need for 
an inclusive partnership, while underscoring the central role of the WTO Consultative Mechanism on 
Cotton Development Assistance as an international for um of reference.  
5.32.   The African Group reiterates its commitment to working towards strengthening the 
multilateral trading system through fair rules and measurable outcomes that will ultimately have a 
significant impact on the living conditions of  millions of people in Africa. The Group calls for more 
political will and urges WTO Members to continue their efforts to grant African cotton its rightful 
place in the global markets.  
5.33.   The representative of Djibouti , on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
5.34.   The LDC Group  would like to thank  the Director -General for her report on the development 
assistance aspects of the cotton issue and take s note of it.  Cotton constitutes one of these products 
with a systemic and strategic importance in the econom ies of several LDCs. It is both a basic product 
as well as an element of subsistence and income for millions of people around the world and WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 56 - 
 
  particularly in LDCs.  We welcome the holding during this year of a range of activities on aspects of 
the cotton issu e relating to development assistance.  
5.35.   The latest revised version of the Director -General Evolving Table on Cotton Development 
Assistance revealed that specific aid for cotton exceeded USD 355 million, compared to USD 277 
million in the previous revision. However, the supply and demand for cotton on the world market for 
the 2022/2023 campaign contracted with drops of 2  per cent  and 7.55  per cent  respectively 
compared to the previous one. This demonstrates the need to continue supporting cotton farmers 
in LD Cs. In this regard, the LDC Group commends all development partners who have provided 
support to cotton -producing LDCs through the implementation of different types of development 
projects.  
5.36.   Based on the mandates given by Ministers at the MC6 in Hong Kong, at the MC9 in Bali and 
at the MC10 in Nairobi, the LDC Group calls for an outcome on cotton to correct the imbalances that 
distort cotton trade on the international market so that cotton producers in LDCs can mainly make 
a living from their activities by t aking better advantage of global value chains.  
5.37.   In conclusion, the LDC Group urges traditional and non -traditional development partners to 
support all forms of development initiatives and projects aimed at addressing issues related to the 
transformation of the cotton sector, the disruption of cotton value chains, the reduction in production 
and the decline in cotton exports in LDCs.  
5.38.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the C -4, delivered the following statement:  
5.39.   I am making this stateme nt on behalf of the C -4 and the Republic of Côte d'Ivoire, as well as 
all of the 36 African countries that produce and/or export cotton and its by -products. Allow us to 
express our deep appreciation to the Secretariat for its ongoing involvement alongside us. We 
acknowledge the importance and interest of the work carried out on cotton and wish to express our 
gratitude to all our partners for their valuable support and for helping us to better integrate into the 
multilateral trading system. Our thanks go to the Director -General for the 10th Periodic Report on 
the development assistance aspects of cotton.  
5.40.   The C -4 has followed with great interest the development assistance trends recorded in the 
Evolving Tables, from the first round of consultations to today. In this regard, the C -4 is pleased to 
note the positive trends in the 36th updated version of the Evolving Table on Cotton Development 
Assistance.  
5.41.   The Evolving Table is a reference tool to monitor trends and trace the evolution of 
development -assistance projects supporting the cotton sector. The C -4 also welcomes the progress 
made at the last Partners' Conference to Support Development Assistance for Cotton and the World 
Cotton Day celebration held on 4 October 2023 in Vienna, Austr ia. 
5.42.   However, the C -4 notes the low level of disbursement for some 10-cotton  specific 
development assistance projects. We would also like to point out the unchanging status of the 11 
new projects submitted by the C -4 and its members, and by Cameroon and Bur undi, almost all of 
which are still waiting for technical assistance and/or funding for their implementation.  
5.43.   In light of all these concerns, the C -4 would like to reiterate its Call for Action, urging 
"WTO  Members and multilateral agencies to commit furth er financial and technical resources, as part 
of their global development assistance strategies, to allow cotton producing developing countries, in 
particular the LDCs, to fully exploit the opportunities cotton offers for livelihood improvement, decent 
work creation and environmentally sustainable value addition".  
5.44.   Similarly, the C -4 would like to underscore the importance of its regional and integrative 
"Cotton Roadmap", the effective implementation of which will create competitive, inclusive and 
sustainabl e value chains that are beneficial in terms of the local processing of cotton fibre and 
capacity -building among stakeholders in the cotton sector.  
5.45.   We also welcome the launch of the implementation of the Memorandum of Understanding 
establishing a partnershi p between the WTO and FIFA, one of the aims of which is to work towards 
including C -4 and LDC cotton producers in apparel value chains.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 57 - 
 
  5.46.   Investment is also still essential to boost production and yields. Coordination among the 
sector's stakeholders is there fore crucial to increase the value of cotton. There should be technical 
cooperation on the use of fibre between producer countries and development partners.  
5.47.   We also believe that access to innovative technologies could help provide cotton producers 
with the  tools they need to increase their yield and, thus, their income.  
5.48.   We should work to increase the productivity of cotton production systems by arming 
smallholder cotton farmers with the information they need to grow more and better cotton, minimize 
the env ironmental impact and generate more income for their families.  
5.49.   We recall that cotton allows for the development of value chains, from agricultural research 
on seeds to its processing into textile products and other by -products. With this in mind and in 
developing the cotton value chain, our young people will not be tempted by the risky options of 
migration or rural exodus. Cotton also contributes to guaranteeing peace, dignity and prosperity, 
and thus to achieving the Sustainable Development Goals.  
5.50.   For the se reasons, we would like to call on all our partners to contribute to the effective 
implementation of the various projects.  The development partners play a key role in our capacity to 
develop our cotton production, improve its quality, and ensure that our  raw output is processed into 
higher value finished products that can then be exported to various markets.  
5.51.   Regarding the trade component, I would like to stress that cotton is a crucial sector for us, 
and tangible outcomes have remained elusive in this ar ea since the launch of the sectoral initiative 
in 2003.  
5.52.   We therefore believe that MC13 should send a reassuring message on cotton and that there 
should be continued fulfilment of the commitments Members made to address cotton "ambitiously, 
expeditiously a nd specifically" as part of the agriculture negotiations. To that end, the C -4 has 
submitted a draft decision on cotton and hopes that a broad consensus will be reached on this draft 
with a view to its adoption at MC13.  
5.53.   Before I conclude, I would like to take this opportunity to reiterate the C -4's appreciation for 
its partners and all actors in the consultation mechanism. The C -4 wishes to express its strong desire 
to see, in the next version of the Evolving Table, positive developments in support of the various 
development projects in Africa's cotton sector that still await funding.  
5.54.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
5.55.   Cotton is of high importance for LDCs, especially for those 30 African countries that produce 
or trade it. Bra zil supports, in the framework of a comprehensive reform of the AoA, an outcome on 
cotton at the 13th Ministerial Conference.  Brazil continues to support LDCs in cotton and cotton -
related sectors through the Brazilian Programme to Support the Development o f the Cotton Sector 
in Africa. The Brazilian cooperation aims at increasing cotton productivity and improve fiber quality 
in 18 African countries. As highlighted by the report, the south -south contribution is a form of 
cooperation based on solidarity, with  shared goals of improving productivity, inclusiveness, and 
sustainability in the cotton sector.  
5.56.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
5.57.   We wish to thank the Director -General for her periodic report and the technical assistance 
activities carried out to date. There is an urgent need to address the matter of cotton in the 
agriculture negotiations, across all negotiating pillars. We concur that specific outcomes on cotton 
can be reached at the next Ministerial Conference  as part of a holistic package that meets the needs 
of the C -4, in a holistic package of agricultural outcomes.  
5.58.   The cotton sector needs to be reformed urgently, since, as evidenced in the Cairns Group 
document on concentrations of support, cotton is still one of the most distorted sectors, with its 
support heavily concentrated among just a few Members. We support the C -4's efforts to create 
fairer, more equitable and more market -oriented trade in the cotton sector. As proponents of the 
Cairns Group paper on  modalities for domestic support, contained in JOB/AG/243/Rev.1 , we are WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 58 - 
 
  convinced that the alternatives set out therein will further this objective.  Lastly, as we did in the CoA  
SS, we would like to invite the C -4 to work together with us to deve lop the market access pillar in 
its future proposals.  
5.59.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
5.60.   China thanks the DG for her report.  China has 27 million cotton farmers and the majority of 
them are small -scale farmers. Therefore, we ful ly understand the critical role that cotton sector plays 
in C-4 and other African cotton producing Members.  We appreciate the very positive remarks by the 
DG's report on South -South cooperation on Cotton, quote, "Brazil, China, India and Pakistan have 
continued to provide significant support to LDCs in cotton and cotton -related sectors. These 
Members' contribution is particular remarkable as a form of cooperation based on solidarity, and on 
these Members' shared goal of improving productivity, inclusiveness , and sustainability in the cotton 
sector", end of the quote. China will continue to strengthen our cotton development support and 
cooperation through South -South Cooperation and other platforms.  
5.61.   We commend the Secretariats' effort on compiling and updatin g the cotton development 
projects through the Evolving Table. We hope this work can be further strengthened by building a 
comprehensive cotton development assistance platform, including registering, analyzing and 
assessing on all the work so far, so as to help Members better understand the needs of C4 and other 
African cotton producing members.  
5.62.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
5.63.   India would like to thank the Director -General  for her report and give a brief update on our 
contribution. After the successful completion of the first phase of the Cotton Technical Assistance 
Program, phase two of the CTAP is being implemented over a five -year period . It includes five 
additional Afri can countries making it to a total of 11 countries, namely Benin, Burkina Faso, Chad, 
Mali, Malawi, Nigeria, Uganda, Ghan a, Togo, Tanzania and Gambia. The focus of CTAP 2 is increasing 
cotton production and improving the post -harvest and plant byproducts i ndustry in the participating 
countries, as well as building the capacity of the cotton -based textile sector.  
5.64.   The Director -General  delivered the following statement:  
5.65.   I thank all those who commented and who looked at the report , and again to particularly 
appreciate the South -South cooperation that is inherent in what we have listened to here. I strongly 
encourage that it goes on and expands . I look forward to really moving on this sector , which is so 
important to a lot of poor countries.  
5.66.   The General Council took note  of the statement by the Director -General  on her report  in 
document WT/GC/260  – WT/CFMC/DG/10  – WT/MIN(2 4)/1 and of the statements.  
6  TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS  
A. ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL COMPULSORY LICENSING SYSTEM – 
PARAGRAPH  7 OF THE ANNEX TO THE AMENDED TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PARAGRAPH 8 
OF THE DECISION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION  OF PARAGRAPH 6 OF THE DOHA 
DECLARATION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH ( WT/L/540  AND 
WT/L/540/CORR .1) – REPORT OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRIPS ( IP/C/97 ) 
B. PROPOSAL FOR A DECISION ON AN EXTENSION OF THE PERIOD FOR THE 
ACCEPTANCE BY MEMBERS OF THE PROTOCOL AMEN DING THE TRIPS AGREEMENT 
(IP/C/96 ) 
6.1.  The Chairperson  said that the  item contain ed two sub -items  and she proposed to  take both 
items  up together , and to open  the floor only once. She recalled  that, in August 2003, the General 
Council had adopted a Decision on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on 
the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health. She further noted that  the General Council had also 
adopted, in December 2005, a Protoc ol amending the TRIPS Agreement. In accordance with 
Article  X:3 of the WTO Agreement, the Protocol had entered into force on 23 January 2017, upon 
acceptance by two -thirds of the WTO Members.  She recalled that b oth the amended WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 59 - 
 
  TRIPS  Agreement and the 2003  Decision provide d that the TRIPS Council shall review annually the 
functioning of the system and shall also report on its operation to the General Council.  She further 
recalled  that the Members that were yet to accept the Protocol amending the TRIPS Agreem ent 
currently ha d until 31 December 2023 to do so. She then invited  Ambassador Pimchanok Pitfield 
(Thailand), Chairperson of the Council for TRIPS, to report on these two matters.  
6.2.  Ambassador Pimchanok P itfield  (Thailand), Chairperson of the Council for TRI PS, delivered the 
following statement:  
6.3.  As you will recall, the Amendment to the TRIPS Agreement entered into force in January 2017. 
The amendment provides a special compulsory licensing system for the benefit of countries which 
rely on imports of medical t echnologies because of insufficient or no domestic pharmaceutical 
manufacturing capacities. It makes permanent the related rules already contained in the earlier 
waiver decision.  
6.4.  At its meeting of 30 -31 October, the TRIPS Council completed its annual revie w of the 
functioning of  the System, pursuant to paragraph 7 of the amended TRIPS Agreement and 
paragraph  8 of the  Decision of 30 August 2003 on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha 
Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health.  
6.5.  The TRIPS C ouncil's report on this review to the General Council has been circulated in 
document IP/C/97 , which is Sub -item A of this Agenda Item. It includes information about the 
implementation and use of the System, as well as on the status of acceptances of the Protocol 
Amending the TRIPS Agreement.  
6.6.  Pursuant to the General Council's decision in 2021, the Protocol is open for acceptance by the 
remaining Members until 31  December 2023 or such later date as may be decided by the Ministerial 
Conference ( WT/L/1122 ). Despite indica tions that a number of Members are making domestic efforts 
in this regard, there are still 27 WTO Members that are yet to accept the Protocol. The TRIPS Council, 
therefore, agreed to propose to the General Council a decision to extend the period for accept ance 
by two more years, i.e., until 31  December 2025. This proposal is set out in document IP/C/96 , 
which is Sub -item B of this Agenda Item. On behalf of the TRIPS Council, I am submitting this to 
the General Council for a decision today.  
6.7.  Before I conclude, I would  like to call upon those Members who have yet to accept the Protocol 
to expedite action. A practical guide on how to do so is also available on the WTO's webpage on 
TRIPS and public health. Me and the Secretariat team, as always, will be happy to provide f urther 
assistance if necessary.  
6.8.  The representative of Colombia  delivered the following statement:  
6.9.  I would like to take the floor briefly to say that the report submitted has left me with a sense 
of unease. Indeed, we see once again how the amendment to the TRIPS Agreement establishing 
Article 31 bis and thereby the special compulsory licensing mechanism, has not worked as it should. 
Despite the considerable efforts of the Secretariat and certain countries, the mechanism has not 
actually been used, and its practical impact is far from striking the desired balance identified when 
discussions began in 2001.  
6.10.   I would like to point out that the same thing seems to be happening with the waiver agreed 
upon at MC12. The waiver has not been used once, and its practical impact is far from striking the 
desired balance identified when discussions began in 2020. When we broaden the waiver, it will 
likely lead to an increase in its use – and we will discuss this tomorrow – but as things stand, the 
fact is th at it has not been used.  The problem is that when we agreed on these flexibilities, we 
ladened them with so many requirements and conditions that we made them unfeasible in practice. 
While the solutions have proved ineffective, the problem remains.  
6.11.   Both i nitiatives sought to resolve the rigidity of export and import requirements for a number 
of countries. The most important part of the special mechanism under Article 31 bis and of the 
COVID -19 waiver revolves around Article 31(f) of the TRIPS Agreement, in other words around the 
artificial restriction on export markets imposed by this requirement. With this requirement, the WTO 
went far beyond what was established for unauthorized uses in the WIPO Agreements.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 60 - 
 
  6.12.   The decisions we reached in the past acknowledged  this problem. But the solutions we offered 
have not worked as they should, and the problem is far from being resolved. It has been and will be 
repeated. The Article 31(f) limitation is and will be a restriction that is unfair and too strict for two 
groups  of developing countries that cannot make proper use of the counterbalances under the 
TRIPS  Agreement  - countries that are net importers (limited by the lack of local manufacturing) and 
sandwich countries (limited by their naturally small market size).  
6.13.   With this in mind, I would like to call for an in -depth review of this restriction in the medium 
term. In light of the unsuccessful experiences we have accumulated, such as the one being reviewed 
under this agenda item today, we should recognize that this is  a key issue that we must address 
together and that we cannot weigh it down with new requirements, annexes, appendices and 
footnotes that would eventually make the solution unworkable. To restore the balance established 
in the TRIPS Agreement, we need to f ind a relevant, comprehensive solution to the problem clearly 
outlined in this report.  
6.14.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
6.15.   Nigeria recognizes the difficulty faced by some Members that are still undertaking domestic 
process es required to accept the Protocol amending the TRIPS Agreement , as well as to deposit the 
Instrument of Acceptance. We note that this process is taking longer than expected, we therefore 
welcome the decision in document IP/C/96 . 
6.16.   The Chairperson  said that as reported b y the TRIPS Council Chairperson , this draft decision 
was before the Council  for action , and she proposed that the General Council take note of the report 
of the TRIPS  Council in document IP/C/97  and adopt the draft decision in document IP/C/96 
extending the time period for acceptance by Members of the Protocol amending the TRIPS 
Agreement until 31  December 2025.  
6.17.   The General Council so agreed . 
7  COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION – REPORTS ON MEETINGS 
OF 17 OCTOBER ( WT/BFA/216 ) AND 22 NOVEMBER 2023 ( WT/BFA/217 ) 
7.1.  The Chairperson  drew Members'  attention to the reports of the Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administration, in documents WT/BFA/216  and WT/BFA/217 , and invited  Ambassador Bettina 
Waldmann (Germ any), Chairperson of the CBFA, to introduce them.  
7.2.  Ambassador Bettina Waldmann (Germany), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administration , delivered the following statement:  
7.3.  Since my last report to the General Council, the CBFA has met o n several occasions, both in 
formal and informal mode. I would like to present to you the CBFA reports for formal meetings of 
the Committee that took place in October and November.  
7.4.  In particular, my remarks today will focus on the meeting of the CBFA held on 22 November 
2023, which continued and concluded on 12 December. The report of that meeting can be found in 
document WT/BFA/217 .  
7.5.  Following constructive and solutions -oriented discussions over several months, the Secretariat 
circulated a document entitled "Updated Secretariat WTO 2024 -2025 Budget Proposal and 
Disposition of the 2021 Budget Surplu s". That document is dated 29 November 2023 and bears the 
reference WT/BFA/W/659/Corr.1 .  
7.6.  At the continuation of the 22 November formal meeting of the CBFA on 12 December, there 
was widespread consensus among almost all Members with regard to the following elements of the 
budget compromise:  
1. A 3.6  per cent  increase in the operational budget for 2024 and 2025;  
2. The Secretariat proposal regarding the use of the 2021 CHF 6 million surplus, including 
returning CHF 4 million to Members; and  
3. The WTO's contribution to the ITC budget.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 61 - 
 
   
7.7.  Members were also in agreement that the proposed increase of an additional 0.9 per  cent for 
2025 (the second year of the biennium) can be put aside for now and discussed in the context of a 
possible mid -term re view in 2024.  
7.8.  Moreover, there was strong support by most Members to endorse the recommendation by the 
WTO Pension Management Board regarding the closing of the funding gap and to establish a Working 
Group to examine the question of deeper pension reform. There was also broad agreement that 
action must be taken to address the funding gap in the near term, and not in the much longer period 
of time that would be required to consider deeper structural changes to the Pension Plan.  
7.9.  However, three Members were n ot yet ready to endorse the recommendation by the 
Management Board. The Committee therefore deferred the matter for now and decided to revert to 
it in early 2024.  
7.10.   Personally, I believe that it is unfortunate that we were not able to take a decision regard ing 
the immediate question of the Pension Plan funding gap, while simultaneously establishing a Working 
Group to examine and, if appropriate, propose longer term structural reform of the WTOPP. Staff 
and retirees deserve a stable pension, so we must return  to close the funding gap quickly.  
7.11.   That said, the recommendations in relation to which there was widespread consensus can be 
found in paragraph 3.14 of the CBFA report contained in document WT/BFA/217 . They foresee that:  
1. The 2024 -2025 WTO budget in the amo unt of CHF 204,928,900 will be financed as follows: 
(a) contributions by Members in the amount of CHF 203,100,000; and (b) miscellaneous 
income estimated at CHF 1,828,900.  
2. The WTO budgetary surplus as at 31 December 2021, amounting to CHF 6 million, wil l be 
utilized as follows: (a) CHF 2 million will be used for certain non -recurring expenses (CHF 1.5 
million in 2024 and 0.5 million in 2025); and (b) CHF 4 million will be applied against Members' 
contributions for 2024.  
3. The amount to be provided by th e WTO to the International Trade Centre, UNCTAD/WTO  
budget for 2024 and 2025, shall be CHF 18,968,250 per year.  
4. Secure and predictable financing will be provided for the implementation of the 2024 -2025 
Biennial Technical Assistance and Training Plan, as a pproved by the Committee on Trade and 
Development.  
 
7.12.   As to the budget compromise, one Member indicated that it still needed some time to consult 
with its capital and thus was not able at the time of the CBFA meeting held on 12 December to join 
all others in  endorsing the recommendations contained in document WT/BFA/217 , for approval by 
the General Council.  
7.13.   In my capacity as CBFA Chair, I am therefore communicating these recommendations to the 
General Council for appropriate action.  
7.14.   The Chairperson  thanked the  CBFA Chair for her report . She noted that there were some 
positive developments to report . She had been informed that that Member that could previously not 
join consensus at the CBFA meeting, was now in a position to do so . 
7.15.   The representative of Chinese T aipei delivered the following statement:  
7.16.   We have seen the CBFA Chair  and the Secretariat working hard with Members on hammering 
out a viable budgetary suggestion for 2024 -2025 to ensure WTO's smooth operation.  We will be 
ready to join the consensus to support the budget proposal notwithstanding that we made a number 
of comments at the CBFA meetings. We look forward to the WTO's continued efficient and 
transparent operations.  
7.17.   There is an additional point here . For any external organization being supported by the 
WTO's  budget, i.e., the well -recognized ITC for its performance in the fields of MSMEs and women 
empowerment, we would urge that it is ensured to act in an open and non -discriminatory manner 
regarding its  exchanges and cooperations with all WTO Members.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 62 - 
 
  7.18.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
7.19.   Switzerland would like to thank the Chair of the CBFA  for her report and the hard work she 
has put, together with the Secretariat and delegations, into this process.  The compromise found for 
which we could establish consensus is not the optimal solution in our view, as we would have been 
ready to accept the DG's initial budget proposal. It is about securing the resources enabling the 
Secretariat to deliver high quality services as requested by Members.  But we understand the 
budgetary constraints and caution of many Members. In that sense, the solution found represents a 
reasonable and responsible compromise.  We already now  invite all Members to carefully examine 
the Secretariat's resource situation at the next Mid -Term Review, upcoming before the end of 2024.   
7.20.   Regarding the Pension Plan, we find it regrettable that very few Members could not join the 
consensus regarding the  Reform.  We are in favour of establishing a Working Group to examine a 
more fundamental reform of the Pension Plan, but this is a complex issue and will take time. At the 
same time, there is a clear cost of waiting to fill the actuarial gap in the Pension Plan which is 
currently increasing steadily.  We urge Members to address the situation in early 2024 in the CBFA 
in order to agree on a timely solution before examining the possibilities of a more fundamental 
reform.  
7.21.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
7.22.   My intervention is just on call to the WTO membership. We have been talking in this house 
on the need to support the Secretariat to be more productive. We also have been talking among 
ourselves on the need to enhance processes – even on negotiations, we have established that trust 
has been a challenge, and because of that we have not been reaching convergence in most of the 
issues. In recent times, we observed certain things that needed to be improved in the WTO. With 
the efficient leadership presently, they have come up with solutions through which these challenges 
to Secretariat will be addressed. So , the issue of additional requests for funding was presented 
before Members, and we met several times. We made observations. The Secretariat went back and 
responded to tho se questions, and I feel that in terms of budgeting, it really should not be an issue. 
Our target on the Secretariat is much, and to get tho se results, then we have to support them with 
their budget request. I urge thos e Members who still have concern to reflect and change their mind, 
so that we can immediately approve the support and request by WTO, so  that they can give us the 
best that we want.  
7.23.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
7.24.   Singapo re is pleased that following the extensive and thorough discussion on the WTO 2024 -
2025 biennium budget, the CBFA is now able to present a budget proposal to the GC. As noted in 
WT/BFA/218 , the CBFA met a total of thirteen times since July 2023 to discuss the  budget, which 
gives Members a good sense of the importance of this matter. Allow me to make three brief points.  
7.25.   First, when the Director -General first presented her budget proposal in July 2023, Singapore 
stated clearly that we were prepared to positively  consider it for three reasons. One, Singapore's 
consistent position is that if Members want to ensure that the WTO is fit for purpose, it has to be 
equipped with the necessary resources. Two, Singapore is satisfied that the Secretariat has been 
prudent an d transparent in its management of the budget. In fact, the Secretariat conducted five 
informal technical sessions to address various issues, including HR policies, staffing considerations, 
and travel expenditure. Three, Singapore is of the view that the b udget proposal has taken into 
account Members' sensitivities and budgetary challenges.  
7.26.   Second, Singapore can join the consensus on the recommendations contained in WT/BFA/217  
even though it is sub -optimal. The 3.6  per cent  increase and the use of CHF 2m from the 2021 
surplus will allow the Secretariat to respond to key pressure points such as inflation and non -
recurring expenditures.  
7.27.   Third, we should seriously examine how we can better manage the budget approval process 
and avoid such a last -minute scramble. It would also be helpful to begin consultations on the next 
mid-term budget review discussion and  take into account DG Ngozi's report during the TNC on 
12 December  2023 concerning the Secretariat's transformation process and strategic vision.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 63 - 
 
  7.28.   The represen tative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
7.29.   I would like to express my appreciation the CBFA Chair, the Director -General , and her team 
for their tireless efforts and communication on budgetary matters.  Indeed, we understand the 
difficulties face d by the Secretariat in managing the budget in the current challenging economic 
conditions. Therefore, we appreciate the efforts made by the Secretariat to streamline its operations 
and reduce costs.  
7.30.   In addition, we support the immediate establishment of a  Working Group to monitor the 
Pension Fund and possibly other related issues as deemed necessary. This Working Group will 
provide Members with the opportunity to discuss these issues in more detail and develop 
recommendations to address them.  We look forward to discussions on these issues early next year 
to address the challenges facing the Pension Fund.  
7.31.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
7.32.   Paraguay wishes to express its support for the proposal and the recommendations subm itted.  
We would like to commend the leadership of the CBFA Chair  and DDG Ellard in finding pragmatic 
solutions with Members, including the information technology budgetary requirements requested to 
implement the "reform -by-doing" digital solutions, an ini tiative of which we are proponents. We 
appreciate the consensus emerging among Members, noting in particular the careful analysis of the 
elements set out in the recommendations. The proposal for a 3.6  per cent  increase in the operational 
budget for 2024 an d 2025 reflects our commitment to strengthen WTO operations. We also welcome 
the proposal regarding the use of the 2021 surplus, including returning CHF 4 million to Members, 
as a sign of responsible financial management. We trust that, with further discus sion, the Pension 
Plan can reach a satisfactory consensus.  
7.33.   The Director -General  delivered the following statement:  
7.34.   I would like to sincerely thank Members for approving a modest budget increase for the WTO. 
I want to thank all those who supported a n even highe r proposal  and worked hard. I want to thank 
all of you that worked for the compromise, and finally got all Members around it. It is much 
appreciated. This is the Organization's first adjustment in the past 12 years of zero nominal growth. 
I am please d that we have been successfully proving to you the need for this request, especially at 
a time that is  hard for  many for you. I appreciate your recognition of pressing inflationary and 
contractual  obligations. This compromise brought together different gr oups of Members - those that 
wanted full increase of 7.4 per cent as I had originally requested, those who wanted something less 
than a full increase, and those that preferred to stay at zero nominal growth. In addition, the 
compromise will result in a cre dit of CHF 4 million against Members' 2024 contributions.  
7.35.   The compromise will help us do our job better for you. It shows that you Members care about 
this Organization, and that we do is useful for you and the people you represent. This is an important 
signal - especially as we prepare for MC13. That is why we fought so hard. This compromise shows 
that we can agree by consensus and deliver here in Geneva. It is also a vital show of support for our 
staff and will help with staff morale. I am grateful for th is point, as we mentioned to you, or as I had 
said during my CBFA interventions, you may not know it, but staff morale was a serious issue.  
7.36.   I wish to thank the CBFA Chair for her tremendous effort and her commitment and the 
excellent work of the Committee.  Thank you for the personal effort you put into it. I also wish to 
thank DDG Ellard and the Secretariat team for their hard work and dedication to this effort. Many 
people will not know the sleepless nights that went into this, maybe some of you have an id ea that 
understand what it entails in revising a position so many times.  
7.37.   I would like to thank the Pension Management Board and its Chair for al l the work done on 
how to address the funding gap in WTO's pension plan. Although most were ready to join conse nsus 
to adopt the Boards' recommendation and establish a working group  to consider broader reform. As 
we heard , a few Members were not yet ready to join this consensus. As such, we will not be able to 
proceed on this matter  today , and as the Chair said, we will defer it to next year. In the meantime, 
the gap continues to grow. Staff members and retire es deserve a stable predictable and well-
functioning  pension plan, it's a top priority to them and something  they look at. As they work,  they 
need to know that  when they leave their future will be secured. Therefore,  I am happy to hear that WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 64 - 
 
  Members  will revert  to this matter early next year. This will give staff some hope. I look forward to 
doing all we can to work with Members , so that the pension matter can be  settled as quickly,  and 
the working group  is established to get some results. I wish to thank all Members once more for 
making this gesture. It's a good  Christmas gesture.  
7.38.   The Chairperson  then invite d the General Council to take note of Ambassador Waldmann's 
statement and the other statements made; approve the Budget Committee's specific 
recommendations in paragraphs 3.14 of the report in WT/BFA/217 ; and adopt the reports contained 
in WT/BFA/216  and WT/BFA/217 . 
7.39.   The General Council so agreed . 
7.40.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
7.41.   I wanted to make sure the issue was gaveled before I intervene . I wanted to express the 
United States ' gratitude to  the Secretariat ; to DDG Ellard ; to the CBFA Chair - who worked tirelessly 
on the issu e. We asked a lot of questions,  but this  is our duty , on behalf of our tax payers. I just  
wanted to express our thanks for all the wonderful work, and we will continue.  
7.42.   Ambassador Bettina  Waldmann (Germany), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administration , delivered the following statement:  
7.43.   I just wanted to add my thanks to all Members for helping identify a landing zone for the 
budget compromise. I would also like to thank DDG Ellard and her team for the dedication and 
commitment over a period of many moments. This is the first time that we have been able to come 
together to agree on an increase in the operational budget of the WTO following 12 years of zero 
nominal gr owth. 
7.44.   Moreover, we are committed to continue our work with respect to pension reform, as I said 
before, to support the Secretariat staff and retirees.  
7.45.   I thank you all also for appreciating my work. I had some sleepless nights because of what 
may happen if  there was no budget.  
8  WTO PENSION PLAN – AMENDMENT TO THE REGULATIONS ( WT/GC/W/906 )12 
9  LDC GRADUATION (ANNEX 2 OF WT/GC/W/807/REV.2 ) – REPORT BY THE 
CHAIRPERSON OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT TO THE GENERAL 
COUNCIL ( WT/COMTD/LDC/30 ) 
9.1.  The Chairperson  noted that a t the July meeting, the General Council agreed that the 
Sub-Committee on LDCs would continue the discussion on Annex 2 of the LDC graduation proposal 
contained in WT/GC/W/807/Rev.2  and to report to the General C ouncil by 30 November 2023 with 
any recommendations.  She then offered the floor to Ambassador José R. Sanchez -Fung (Dominican 
Republic), the Chairperson of the Committee on Trade and Development, who ha d been chairing the 
meetings of the Sub -Committee on L DCs since September 2023, pending the election of the 
Chairperson of the Sub -Committee on LDCs.  
9.2.  Ambassador José Sánchez -Fung (Dominican Republic), Chairperson of the Committee on Trade 
and Development , delivered the following statement:  
9.3.  Following the inst ruction by the General Council in July this year to examine Annex 2 of the 
LDC graduation proposal, the LDC Sub -Committee began its work in September. I have provided a 
succinct summary of the main discussions in my report to the General Council which has been 
circulated in document WT/COMTD/LDC/30 . 
9.4.  I will not repeat what I have said in my report. I would just like to underline a few points:  
 
12 Item 8 contained in WTO/AIR/GC/53  entitled "WTO Pension Plan – Amendment to the Regulations 
(WT/GC/W/906 )" was withdrawn from the  agenda at the time of adopting the agenda.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 65 - 
 
  9.5.  First, we have tried our best to advance the discussions through informal sessions of the LDC 
Sub-Committee. We have had five informal meetings and one small group consultation. All the 17 
S&D provisions identified by LDCs in Annex 2 were taken up in clusters, and we had a good exchange 
of views on all the key issues in the proposal ranging from market access to subsidies to intellectual 
property matters. We now have a better understanding of the background of all the LDC -specific 
provisions in WTO Agreements and decisions identified in Annex 2.  
9.6.  Second, the discussions were facilitated by the factual presentations  from the Secretariat. I 
would like to thank the Secretariat for being available at short notice. We have also been reassured 
that a wide range of technical assistance remains available to graduating LDCs for their effective 
participation in the system.  
9.7.  Third, the discussions have been substantive. I would like to thank Members for their positive 
and constructive engagements. We have covered a lot of ground. At the same time, I believe some 
further discussion is necessary to better understand the specific c hallenges of graduating LDCs and 
to explore possible avenues for support. I would, therefore, like to request the General Council to 
provide some additional time to the LDC Sub -Committee to further examine the provisions in 
Annex  2 with a view to making an y possible recommendations to the General Council to ensure a 
smooth transition for graduating LDCs. We can also try to use the limited time we have before MC13 
to see whether some progress can be made, for Ministers consideration at MC13.  
9.8.  Overall, Members  remain committed to support the LDCs on their path to graduation. We 
already achieved an important outcome on Annex 1 during the senior officials meeting in October. 
And I stand ready to support any process going forward.  
9.9.  The representative of Djibouti , on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
9.10.   The LDC Group thanks the LDC Sub-Comm ittee Chairperson for his report 
(WT/COMTD/LDC/30 ) and facilitating the discussion. We are grateful to all delegations for their 
constructive engageme nt at the sub -committee. The LDC Group also thanks the Secretariat 
colleagues for their expert reflections on the Annex  2 listed provisions. Our Group has submitted a 
document ( WT/GC/W/919 ) to summarize  our thoughts on the remaining work on the Annex  2 of the 
LDC graduation proposal for the consideration of Members.  
9.11.   As highlighted in the report of the LDC Sub -Committee Chair, we have gone through an 
in-depth review of the different LDC -specific provisions listed in Annex  2 of our proposal, and 
explained the  rationale for extending them to graduated LDCs for a reasonable period of time.  The 
LDC-specific provisions in WTO have been approved by the whole membership to respond to the 
unique vulnerabilities affecting LDCs, and that WTO Members have already recog nized  that they 
should equally apply to all LDCs. Since graduation is not changing the inherited challenges overnight, 
LDC-specific provisions should also be available to Members for some years after their graduation 
from the LDC category.  
9.12.   The LDC Group w elcomes the GC Decision ( WT/L/1172 ) on Annex -1, as we were about to 
begin the SOM. The decision constitutes an important first part agreement and has given us the 
needed momentum toward MC13. The decision on 23 October also addresses several of the market 
acces s-related issues listed in Annex 2. Based on these considerations, the LDC Group is ready to 
review the list of provisions in Annex 2 with a view to reducing those provisions.  
9.13.   Given the critical importance of this issue for the LDC Group, we must avoid en dless debates 
on questions that have already been answered by the LDC Group. This will delay any action on this 
second part of the LDC graduation proposal.   
9.14.   At this stage, Members should first agree on the principle of a transition period, which would 
apply to the provisions listed in Annex 2 for a fixed number of years. We can therefore ask the LDC 
Sub-Committee  to continue its work as provided in the July 20 23 GC meeting and report back to the 
General Council  by 31 January 2024 with precise recommendation to make favourable decision by 
MC13 in this regard.  
9.15.   The General Council  decision in October on Annex  1, concerning unilateral DFQF preferences, 
is a clear recognition that a transition period after graduation from the LDC category is crucial. WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 66 - 
 
  Achieving a successful outcome on Annex  2 will also send a strong signal that the multilateral trade 
system can be responsive to the needs of its more vulnerable Member s.  
9.16.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
9.17.   Bangladesh aligns with the statement by the  LDC Group.  Our delegation thanks the LDC Sub-
Committ ee Chairperson for his report ( WT/COMTD/LDC/30 ) and his facilitating role while the LDC 
Sub-Committee examined the Annex  2 of the LDC graduation proposal. Bangladesh also thanks all 
delegations for their active participation in this exercise aiming a favourable outcome. LDC group' s 
recent submission provides some thoughts and expectations on the remaining works on this 
important topic.  
9.18.   At the LDC Sub -Committee , as mandated by the General Council , Members reviewed the 
different LDC -specific provisions listed in Annex  2 of the LDC p roposal, and we explained the 
rationale for extending them to graduated LDCs for a reasonable period of time. The provisions listed 
in Annex  2 are existing flexibilities and should equally apply to all LDCs, and we request the same 
flexibility for some add itional years after graduation from LDC category.  
9.19.   With all Members, Bangladesh welcomes the General Council  decision ( WT/L/1172 ) on 
Annex  1 of our graduation proposal. This decision also follows the MC12 paragraph 5 direction that 
some WTO measures can play su pportive roles to LDCs after graduation. In other words, the General 
Council  decision is a recognition that a transition period after graduation from LDC category is 
important. As we understood form our discussion at the Sub-Committee , the General Council  
decision will address several of the market access -related components listed in Annex 2.  
9.20.   We thank the Sub -Committee Chair person  for recognizing the need of the LDCs and for his 
suggestion for a little more time to conclude the work. We appreciate this pos itive spirit. We request 
the General Council  to instruct the LDC Sub-Committee  to continue its work, similar to the July 2023 
GC decision, and report back to the GC by January 2024, as proposed by the LDC Coordinator, or 
before the MC13 to help make a favo urable decision at the MC13 on Annex  2. The delegation of 
Bangladesh , along with the LDC Group, looks forward to working constructively with Members on 
this important file.  
9.21.   The representative of Cambodia  delivered the following statement:  
9.22.   My delegation welcomes and appreciates the report of the LDC Sub -Committee Chair contains 
in document WT/COMTD/LDC/30  vis-à-vis his effortless facilitating the discussion on Annex 2 of the 
LDC graduation proposal  (WT/GC/W/807/Rev.2 ). Our appreciation would also extend to the 
constructive engagement of delegations at the sub -committee.  
9.23.   We are delighted that the GC has specifically addressed the Annex 1 or the DFQF part of the 
LDC graduation submission,  adopted by consensus by GC decision ( WT/L/1172 ) in October 2023. 
We once again would like to express our sincerely thank to all Members for their generosity and we 
hope this kindness will continue for our annex 2. The decision is a clear recognition that a tr ansition 
period after graduation from the LDC category is crucial.  
9.24.   We take note that the Sub -Committee Chair has requested for more time to continue the 
work on Annex 2 at the sub -committee. My delegation joins the other to support this request.  
9.25.   Recalling  the decision in July 2023, the GC instructed the LDC Sub-Committee  to continue its 
work and report back to the GC with any recommendation before MC13. We hope that with a renewed 
mandate the LDC sub -committee will intensify its work and will be able to fo rmulate favourable 
recommendations for the LDCs on the Annex 2 provisions.  
9.26.   Finally, my delegation aligns with the LDC  Group' s statement, and we request all Members to 
support the LDC Group proposal plus exercising their intensifying engagement to deliver t he LDC's 
submission ahead of MC13.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 67 - 
 
  9.27.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
9.28.   We welcome the report by the CTD Chairperson. At the outset we wish to associate ourselves 
with the statement delivered on behalf of the African Group.  Paragraph 5 of the MC12 Outcome 
Document acknowledged the challenges of LDCs including the loss of trade -related international 
support measures after graduation and recognizes the importance of WTO measures to address 
those challenges. We reaffirm our support  for this proposal because we believe graduated LDCs 
require support during their transition period to foster stability.  
9.29.   We thank Members for adopting the Annex 1 decision on Extension of Unilateral Duty Free 
and Quota Free Preferences in Favour of Countr ies Graduated from the LDC Category and call on 
Members to give due consideration to the elements of Annex 2 of the proposal and work towards 
achieving consensus on this issue at MC13.  
9.30.   The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
9.31.   Allow me  to extend our sincere appreciation for the comprehensive efforts undertaken by the 
LDC Group, notably Djibouti, in addressing the trade -related challenges faced by Least Developed 
Countries (LDCs) post -graduation. Egypt commends the dedication reflected i n the proposal for WTO 
Smooth Transition Measures, particularly Annex 1, aiming to extend preferences in favour of 
countries graduated from the LDC category.  
9.32.   We warmly welcome the positive decision to adopt Annex 1, recognizing the imperative role 
it plays  in mitigating the potential adverse impacts of graduation on the socio -economic development 
of these countries. The extension of preferences over a Number of years, or a period, as outlined in 
Annex 1, aligns with the principles of a smooth transition, an d underscores the commitment to 
supporting LDCs beyond their graduation.  
9.33.   In tandem with the adoption of Annex 1, Egypt strongly endorses the significance of Annex  2. 
The LDC Group's proposal encompasses vital principles, including exempting specific measur es from 
WTO dispute settlement actions and extending LDC -specific flexibilities and technical assistance 
post-graduation. Egypt firmly believes that adopting Annex 2 is essential in ensuring a sustained 
and sustainable transition for LDCs, safeguarding the ir hard -earned progress.  
9.34.   Recognizing the challenges LDCs face in maintaining development momentum after 
graduation, Egypt supports the call to instruct the Sub -Committee for Least -Developed Countries to 
formulate recommendations for support measures. The p roposed elements in Annex 2, such as 
continued access to technical assistance and the exemption from dispute settlement actions, are 
crucial for fortifying the LDCs' resilience post -graduation.  
9.35.   The representative of Nepal  delivered the following statement : 
9.36.   My delegation supports the statement delivered by the LDC Group  and would like to add few 
points . My delegation thanks the LDC Sub-Committee Chairperson for his report 
(WT/COMTD/LDC/30 ) and for his constructive efforts to deliver on the important assignment. We 
were hopeful that we could come with reasonable recommendations through the LDC Sub -
Committee by the deadline given by the General Council however we could not achieve the expected 
results. We appreciate the constructive engagement of the Members in the LDC Sub -Committee, the 
discussions were useful to understand the matter in detailed.  
9.37.    There are some countries that have met the graduation criteria ; however , their economic 
and social indicators are still very low. Since graduation is not ch anging the inherited challenges 
overnight, LDC -specific provisions should also be available to Members for some years after their 
graduation from the LDC category. Nepal's scheduled graduation is unique that it has not met the 
GNI criteria and will be grad uating without meeting this criterion.  Furthermore, we have been facing 
the several challenges like adverse impact of climate change, inflation, currency depreciation, price 
hike and natural disaster like floods, and recently, earthquake just one month ag o. 
9.38.   The proposed items in the Annex 2 are quite important for Nepal, some of them can provide 
policy spaces for us and some of them provide time flexibilities to us.  The Sub -Committee Chair has 
requested for more time to continue the work on Annex 2 at the Sub-Committee . Therefore, my WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 68 - 
 
  delegation requests General Council to extend the time to discuss in LDC Sub -Committee to find 
creative solutions and recommend to General Council before MC13.  
9.39.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
9.40.   China understands the graduation transition poses substantive difficulties to the LDCs.  China 
appreciates the pragmatism and flexibility which Members showed in finalizing Annex  1 of LDC 
graduation proposal. We hope Members could continue with the same spirit on the discussions of 
Annex 2. China sees the flexibility to be reflected in the discussion of Annex 2 will be helpful to 
graduated LDCs for smooth transition and China will continue to actively participate in the 
discussions with a view to reaching outcom e at an early date.  
9.41.   The representative of Myanmar  delivered the following statement:  
9.42.   This statement is aligned with that of the  LDCs Group. The LDC Group has submitted a 
document to summarize  expectations on the remaining work in LDC graduation. An outcome on 
Annex  2 at the MC13 will be very important for the LDCs. For Annex  1 or the DFQF part of the LDC 
graduation submission by LDCs and adopting a GC decision ( WT/L/1172 ) in October 2023. We urge 
for Members ' support  for the LDC submission on Annex  2 of the LDC graduation proposal.  
9.43.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
9.44.   My delegation appreciates the LDC Sub -Committee Chair for his report which was crips and 
clear. I w ould also like to thank the LDCs and other delegations for constructive engagement at the 
Sub-Committee. An outcome on LDC graduation Annex 2 will go a really long way in supporting the 
LDCs. On the p articular point  the Chair made regarding  the request for  more time, this should be 
afforded. W e support his call and hope that with renewed mandate the Sub -Committee will intensify 
the work and be able to formulate a favorable recommendations to help make a decision at MC13.  
9.45.   A decision to extend this specific f lexibility will have no disruptive impact on global trade. We 
think the LDCs will benefit greatly from meaningful and predictable support to face challenges and 
uncertainties especially in  the early years of graduation. This decision is essential to give t hem space 
to shore up their resilience. We require all Members to support this decision.  
9.46.   The representative of Tanzania  delivered the following statement:  
9.47.   We welcome the GC decision adopted in October during the opening of the Senior Officials' 
Meeting. We welcome the Sub -Committee report. The October decision signifies the concurrence of 
Members on the need for smooth transition for graduating LDCs . LDCs face some serious challenges 
with many risks, risks which put them at risk of  falling back into the LDC category. We encourage 
all Members  to be flexible and finalize remaining work on Annex 2 without further delay. We align 
with the statement by the LDC Gro up. 
9.48.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
9.49.   I would like to thank the Chairperson for his leadership in conducting the discussions on the 
LDC graduation proposal Annex 2, and for the summary report he presented.  The chal lenges involved 
in LDC graduation merit a specific response from the Membership, and this is why the European 
Union is engaging constructively on Annex 2 of the LDC proposal.  The European Union is ready to 
continue the analytical work on Annex 2 of the pro posal, and we are ready to find a solution to the 
"specific measures" in Annex 2.  
9.50.   The European Union is in favour of flexibilities that are needed and justified. To facilitate a 
smooth transition by LDCs, we would suggest that members conclude their examin ation of the list 
of provisions proposed by the LDC Group in order to establish a "menu of measures" for which LDCs 
can request a short, time -limited extension after graduation. This would then require individual LDCs 
to justify their request based on need s and evidence for the provisions to be extended well before 
they graduate.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 69 - 
 
  9.51.   The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement:  
9.52.   Norway will continue to bring ideas and bridging proposals on development . There is 
momentum here now. The whole mem bership acknowledges the need for smooth transition in 
adopting Annex 1 decision. We have the excellent report by the CTD Chair. Those things are working 
in our favor. Norway wants results on MC13 on Annex 2. We must intensify our efforts in January to 
find a landing zone. What is needed? We think we need a c lear prioritization of some provisions ripe 
for harvest at MC13.  We have two reasonable, meaningful and bridging concrete suggestions to 
make. First, we might have a text in MC13 outcome document on WTO  commitment to needs -based 
demand driven technical assistance ; and second, have to explore a  peace clause as way to shorten 
Annex 2 , making it easier and achieving  the same results.  
9.53.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statemen t: 
9.54.   We thank the CTD Chair for his report, and for the extensive work undertaken in the LDC 
Sub-Committee to examine Annex 2 of the LDC Graduation proposal. We agree with the Chair's very 
good report. The UK wants to see an agreement reached on LDC Graduati on Annex II at MC13. To 
get there, as Norway said, we really need to intensify our discussions in the LDC Subcommittee. 
There are clearly still elements that need to be worked through, and like Norway and others, we are 
very happy and keen to come forward with proposals to find ways to work it through. But it is critical 
that we have very focused , intensified discussions in January to ensure that we can deliver on this 
important issue at MC13.  
9.55.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following  statement:  
9.56.   We thank the CTD Chair for his stewardship on the topic of LDC graduation.  We are engaged 
and we will stay engaged, but as we have said many times, we do believe that this issue, we have 
to do this based on specific needs and based on specific  challenges of Members. One -size-fits-all will 
not work – not for LDCs or developing Members. You have heard me say this many times. We are 
open to work with Members to address the specific needs of LDCs or developing country Members. 
We do believe that th is is a way forward.  
9.57.   I also wish to make a point of order on this item. I understand that this item is just an item 
to hear the report of the CTD Chair on this issue, so not a decision item. We have been presented 
with a proposal for a decision orally here , I want to be clear we do not think that this is correct. If 
there is a decision to be presented to the General Council, it needs to be presented ahead of time 
to be able to consider it. From our perspective, what we are doing here is listening to, and 
commenting on, the report of the Chair . 
9.58.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
9.59.   It is necessary for Members to reach a common understanding regarding the necessity of a 
transition period for each item. Proponents are encouraged to pres ent their specific needs and 
challenges with the cooperation of the Secretariat as necessary. Japan would like to continue to 
deepen our understanding of the necessity of the proposal through evidence -based discussions.  In 
any case, at the thematic session  of LDC graduation, where Members including the LDC group agreed 
to conduct intensive discussions in January, Japan will also participate in those discussions.  
9.60.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statemen t: 
9.61.   The African Group takes note and welcomes the report ( WT/COMTD/LDC/30 ) mandated by 
the General Council to the LDC Sub -Committee to review Annex 2 of the LDC graduation proposal 
(WT/GC/W/807 /Rev.2 ). The African Group is following with interest the 17 provisions relating to 
Special and Differe ntial Treatment (SDT) in the WTO Agreements and Decisions contained in 
Annex  2, with a view to their inclusion in the smooth transition measures in favor of LDCs after their 
reclassification.  
9.62.   The African Group welcomes the decision of the General Council (WT/L/1172 ) on Annex 1, as 
we were about to begin the Senior Officials ' Meeting. The decision constitutes an important first 
agreement and has given us the necessary momentum towards MC13. The 23 October decision also WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 70 - 
 
  addresses several of the market access issu es listed in Annex 2. The October General Council  
decision on Annex 1, regarding unilateral FDSC preferences, is a clear recognition because a 
transition period after graduation from the LDC category is crucial. Achieving a positive outcome on 
Annex 2 will  also send a strong signal that the multilateral trading system can meet the needs of its 
most vulnerable Members.  
9.63.   We have repeatedly stressed that we find it difficult to understand the strong resistance by 
some Members of this proposal by the LDC Group w hich will neither affect the economic 
competitiveness of those Members who continue to oppose it nor grant undue rights to this subset 
of Members, the majority of whom belong to the African Group. The African Group believes that the 
difficulties encountere d by graduating LDCs in implementing WTO rules and disciplines must continue 
to be addressed. Much progress has been made, but we believe that a thorough review of the 17 
SDT proposals identified in Annex 2 would require additional time with a view to maki ng 
recommendations to the General Council.  
9.64.   The upcoming Thirteenth Ministerial Conference could be an opportunity to take another look 
at the progress made, including the possibility of adopting a Decision to further support LDCs in the 
process of graduat ing from this category.  
9.65.   The representative of Fiji, on behalf of the Pacific Group , delivered the following statement:  
9.66.   The Pacific thanks the Chair of CTD for his report on this important issue. We note that work 
is still ongoing to consider Annex 2 as a possible outcome for MC13. We trust that Annex 2 elements 
will be settled in time and encourage Members to favourably co nsider need for smooth transition of 
the most vulnerable.  
9.67.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
9.68.   Indonesia commends the ongoing efforts to facilitate the graduation process for LDCs.  We 
believe that agreeing on Annex 2 of the L DC graduation proposal, which lays out a set of measures 
to ensure LDCs receive necessary support and assistance during the transition phase post -
graduation, should be prioritized and as a low -hanging fruit at MC13.  
9.69.   These recommendations are crucial in add ressing potential challenges LDCs may face upon 
exiting the SNDT regime, such as loss of preferential market access opportunities, increased 
competition, and reduced access to technical assistance and capacity building support.  By agreeing 
on these measure s, WTO Members can help mitigate these challenges, ensure a smooth transition 
to a more level playing field, and prevent LDCs from regressing.  We believe that prioritizing these 
issues will allow WTO Members to play a vital role in supporting LDC graduatio n and promoting 
sustainable development in these nations.  
9.70.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
9.71.   I would like to thank the Chair for his report . His unwavering dedication to bridge differences 
and find common soluti ons is notable. I would also like to thank the Secretariat for providing us with 
thorough presentations on Annex 2 provisions. The Russian Federation  supports the Chair's 
proposition. Allowing for more time should yield positive results and help us in reac hing common 
understanding. We call upon Members to be patient and strengthen their resolve.  
9.72.   The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of the OECS , delivered the following 
statement:  
9.73.   This is simply to indicate that OECS is supportive of a favorable decision on Annex 2 by MC13, 
we support the call for the extension and urge Members to complete the work in the LDC Sub -
Committee ahead of the Ministerial.  
9.74.   The representative of Angola  delivered the following statement:  
9.75.   Angola continues to fully support the revised document WT/GC/W/807/Rev.2  proposed by the 
LDC Group urging WTO Members  to enable future graduated countries to continue to benefit from 
the flexibilities currently en joyed by LDCs, ensuring a smooth transition and a sustainable exit from WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 71 - 
 
  the category. This debate started in the General Council gathered on 16 -17 December 2020, 
continued in October 2021 GC, and received a contextual uphold with the MC12 ministerial 
declaration on LDCs preferential rules of origin, services waiver, duty -free quota -free market access, 
and positive actions regarding graduation from the LDC category. On this path, Angola is particularly 
pleased that the General Council could adopt the importa nt decision WT/L/1172  on the Annex -1 or 
DFQF, thus recognizing the critical gravity of a congruent and smooth transitional period for countries 
graduating from the LDC category.  
9.76.   Allow us to recall again the regrettable situation with which countries like Angol a were 
suddenly confronted since we should have already graduated in 2021 and then postponed to 2024 
due to the irruption of the global COVID -19 pandemic crisis. The postponement of this long waiting 
graduation process had several negative consequences, er oding economic confidence, favorable 
access to capital, investment, loans, and trade markets, thus contradicting the political and social 
mobilization of Angolan public and civil organizations who fought several years for graduation from 
the LDC category a s a just reward for their efforts in work, reforms and modernization of the country. 
Moreover, removing the LDCs from subdevelopment, economic crisis, and social poverty is not a 
mere national ambition but a global imperative that should be a permanent con cern of the WTO. 
Angola reiterates that this is not a merciful agency but a critical global commitment towards 
sustainable world development. Consequently, Angola expects that the forthcoming MC13 will 
approve a formal declaration on a smooth and assisted transition from the LDC category for a 
pertinent period of time that includes exemption from action under the WTO dispute settlement 
mechanism, extension of guarantees of LDC -specific special flexibilities, and continuation of technical 
assistance as liste d in the Appendix of Annex 2 to the present proposal.  
9.77.   Finally, Angola fully supports that this General Council renew a formal mandate to instruct 
the LDC subcommittee to continue to formulate favourable recommendations for the smooth and 
assisted LDC grad uation process by completing the Annex -2 provisions ahead of MC13, thus 
achieving a concrete draft proposal for the approval of the forthcoming Abu Dhabi Ministerial 
Conference.  
9.78.   The representative of India delivered the following statement13: 
9.79.   We would like  to thank the CTD Chair for shouldering the added responsibility. We would also 
like to thank Djibouti for representing LDC s, it is encouraging that the LDC graduation proposal has 
been discussed in the Committee. However, there is some lack since a shared  understanding of 
different dimensions of provisions of Annex 2 has not been achieved so far. We urge Members to be 
sympathetic towards the needs of LDC Members and expedite discussion in a constructive and time 
bound manner, so as to have the decision bef ore MC13.  
9.80.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
9.81.   Brazil acknowledges the efforts of the CTD Chair on the LDC "Smooth and Sustainable" 
transition after Graduation.  We took part in the discussions in a substantive and constructive wa y, 
supporting the demands of the LDC Group and listening to other Members comments. We 
acknowledge that some Members required more time for an in -depth examination of the existing 
LDC-specific flexibilities listed in Annex 2. We hope that such an in -depth analysis does not cost the 
LDCs years of waiting that will in the end result in a watered -down  decision. The existing LDC -
specific flexibilities provisions have passed the test of multilateralism, in the sense that they were 
extensively and carefully negot iated among Members. Its extension or reinstatement should not be 
the object of renewed, lengthy negotiations, rather a prompt recognition that trade in the last 30  
years has not fulfilled its promises  of economic growth or full employment, in particular f or the least -
developed Members of this Organization.  
9.82.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
9.83.   Adoption of Annex 1 in October was a timely and meaningful accomplishment on a 
longstanding development issue. Korea looks f orward to making progress on other development 
issues, including Annex 2 discussions. We hope that these discussions will further proceed in the 
 
13 Following the meeting , the delegation of India submitted subsequently their  oral and written statements 
to the Secretariat for inclusion in the record. India's written statements have been included in the Annex, as 
requested.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 72 - 
 
  LDC subcommittee with needs -and-facts-based assessments to specifically improve the current 
S&DT system, delive ring benefits to Members in transition.  
9.84.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
9.85.   I would also like to echo our appreciation to the CTD Chair  for his leadership and his 
comprehensive and objective report.  Singapore warmly welcomes the Decision on Annex 1 of the 
LDC Graduation Proposal, and the progress made on Annex 2. First, we agree with the Chair's report 
that more time is needed for discussions on Annex 2, and it will be pragmatic to use MC13 as a 
checkpoint to take stock of the  progress made. Second, we should use the remaining time to 
continue engaging constructively on Annex 2 through fact -based discussions. We should seek to 
better understand the challenges faced by graduated LDCs, and how the proposed provisions will 
promote  their development. Third, as the MC12 outcome document emphasised, SDTs should be 
"precise, effective, and operational", hence it should be tailored to the specific needs of Members.  
Singapore will continue to engage closely and constructively with Members to realize  Annex  2. 
9.86.   The representative of Samoa , on behalf of the ACP Group , provided the following statement14: 
9.87.   The ACP Group thanks the Chair for his report.  To continue the success  of the adoption of 
Annex 1 decision on unilateral preferences, the ACP Group encourages Members to support the way 
forward proposed by the LDC Group on  Annex 2, which covers the transition period for selected LDC 
provisions in existing WTO Agreements.  
9.88.   The representative of Djibouti , on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
9.89.   I just wanted to thank all delegations, on behalf of the LDCs, for their comments and views, 
and also encouraging statement and willingness to continue engaging on Annex 2 with the view of 
concluding those discussions. From the LDC perspective, it is important that we work constructively 
on this Annex 2, so that we are in a position to conclude the discussions by the end of January. We 
heard and I wish to reiterat e thanks to CTD Chair for his leadership. We are ready to continue work 
under his leadership. I would urge delegations to really, kindly use time we have available. Time is 
of the essence. We really think it is up to the political will. This will make the difference on how we 
use the time before MC13. As we repeatedly said, as LDCs, we do not need to wait to be in Abu 
Dhabi to gavel on Annex 2. We can have this outcome endorsed by Ministers like Annex 1, but we 
really need to speed up our engagement here, s o that we know what we are bringing in our luggage 
when we get to Abu Dhabi.  
9.90.   I am not sure I understood something about the procedure  that was mentioned before but  I 
will listen to  the recommendation of this General Council with regard to  the request of t he CTD Chair, 
in having more time. So , if this General Council  could also decide that we are continuing this work, 
this would be welcome from the LDC perspective.  
9.91.   The Chairperson  noted that i n view of what I have heard, I take note of the progress made in 
the discussions  and encourage the LDC Group, as well as all interested Members – together with the 
CTD Chairperson - to continue their discussion in the Sub -Committee on LDCs . 
9.92.   The General Council took note  of the report by the CTD Chairperson and of the st atements 
made.  
10  PROPOSED REVISIONS TO WT/L/ 452 "PROCEDURES FOR THE CIRCULATION AND 
DERESTRICTION OF WTO DOCUMENTS" – COMMUNICATION FROM AUSTRALIA; BRAZIL; 
CANADA; COLOMBIA; COSTA RICA; EUROPEAN UNION; NEW ZEALAND; NORWAY; 
SWITZERLAND; SEPARATE CUSTOMS TERRITORY OF TAIWAN, PENGHU, KINMEN AND 
MATSU; THE  UNITED KINGDOM AND THE UNITED STATES ( WT/GC/W/897/REV.1 ) 
10.1.   The Chairperson  said that t he following item "Proposed Revisions to WT/L/452  'Procedures 
for the Circulation and Derestriction Of WTO Documents' – Communication from Australia; Brazil; 
Canada; Colombia; Costa Rica; European Union; New Zealand; Norway; Switzerland; Separate 
 
14 The statement was not delivered at the meeting but subsequently sent to the Secretariat for inclusion 
in the record.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 73 - 
 
  Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen And Matsu; the United Kingdom and the United States 
(WT/GC/W/897/Rev.1 )" had been included in the agenda at the request  of the co -sponsors.  She 
further noted that t his proposal had been  previously discussed at the July General Council meeting . 
She then invited one of the co -sponsors to provide an update on the item and communication.  
10.2.   The representative of Canada  delivered  the following statement:  
10.3.   Thank you for the support this proposal received in July.  For those who are new to this 
proposal, what we have proposed are a series of modest tweaks to the 2002 decision which would 
build on and enhance the transparency of docume nts while retaining the right of any Member to 
keep its own communications restrictions when necessary. It also adds guidance on the WTO 
website.  
10.4.   We believe that this decision will help to modernize the WTO and will help external 
stakeholders to better und erstand this organization and the work that we undertake here. We hope 
that the General Council can agree to make these changes and adopt the resulting revised decision.  
10.5.   The representative of Chile delivered the following statement:  
10.6.   My delegation thanks th e co-sponsors of this draft decision, which seeks to improve the 
transparency of and open up the work of the Organization. We consider it to be a concrete and 
practical step in that direction and we are pleased to offer our support.  
10.7.   The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of the OECS , delivered the following 
statement:  
10.8.   We thank the proponents for this item. As the proponents have noted, we also perceive the 
value of increasing ease of access to official WTO documents. This is an important part of enhancing 
the organization's visibility to the outside world which can have important transparency and 
credibility dividends. We do believe though, that the proposal requires further reflection so as to 
avoid unintended consequences and perhaps we need a deeper conversation on many of the 
recommendations contained in the proposal.  
10.9.   In principle, we are not against derestriction. However, we also believe that this has to 
balanced carefully against the confidentiality which some of our work demands. Paragr aph 5 of the 
proposal, for example, could lead to sensitive negotiating documents and positions being exposed 
to the public prematurely. We perhaps need greater clarity on what types of documents and 
information are best suited to derestriction. Maybe we c an even contemplate a trial basis for certain 
types of documents with the goal of ultimately arriving at a more comprehensive approach.  
10.10.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
10.11.   China appreciates the efforts of co -sponsors on putting f orward the proposal for the 
optimization of procedures for the circulation and derestriction of WTO documents. China supports 
improving the transparency of WTO's daily work, which will help enhance external stakeholders' 
understanding of the WTO.  We are op en to the suggestions that all documents relating to agendas 
or meeting organization could be de -restricted, and meeting minutes could be automatically 
derestricted 30  days after the date of circulation.   
10.12.   However, we are not in the position to support the one-size-fits-all approach and are 
concerned over the potential impact of public access to some sensitive information or documents, 
for example, members' negotiating positions or materials. China stands ready to further engage with 
the proponents on this p roposal.  
10.13.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
10.14.   The European Union, of course, fully supports the statement made by Canada. And we 
encourage Members to engage with this proposal.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 74 - 
 
  10.15.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
10.16.   Japan supports this proposal, since enhanced circulation and derestriction of WTO documents 
would lead to heightened interest and engagement of external stakeholders and eventually 
contribute t o reinvigorating discussions in this organization.  
10.17.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
10.18.   Thank you, Chair, and we thank the proponents of the proposed declaration for their 
submission. We have taken good note of the same. There ar e some paragraphs we are supporting, 
but there are some paragraphs which we would still like to discuss with the proponent. Therefore, 
we are of the view that these would require further discussion. Maybe it would be appropriate that 
the first round of wor k is done in the CTG and maybe in other Councils too, because a similar thing 
was done in the Committee on Market Access.  
10.19.   The representative of Costa Rica  delivered the following statement:  
10.20.   Costa Rica is pleased with this joint communication and welcomes the United States as 
co-sponsor. Transparency is essential for the improved functioning of the Organization, which would 
benefit Members, and for improved WTO outreach, which would benefit stakeholders and the public. 
To that end, it is necessary to facilitate access to documents and relevant information.  
10.21.   The changes we have suggested in the document seek to facilitate such access, and strike 
a balance between Members' right to decide which documents and information should be kept 
confidential and the transparency that stakeholders expect regarding our work. We are of course 
prepared to clear up the doubts raised by some who have taken the floor.  
10.22.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
11  MC13 – IMMEDIATE STEPS TO RESPOND TO FOOD INSECURITY – COMMUNICATION 
FROM SINGAPORE ( WT/GC/ W/908 ) 
11.1.   The Chairperson  said that t he item "MC13 – Immediate Steps to Respond to Food Insecurity" 
had been included in the agenda at the request of the delegation of Singapore – together with the 
communication in WT/GC/W/908 . 
11.2.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
11.3.   Over the course of the past few months, my delegation has been engaging with many 
Members on WT/GC/W/908 . We have consulted widely, with both developed and developed 
Members, with vario us groups including the Cairns Group, G10, G33, ACP, Africa Group, LDCs, OECS, 
and Pacific Group. Based on the consultations, which were very useful, we have distilled what we 
gathered were the possible elements into the Communication that you see before y ou today. I will 
make three brief points.  
11.4.   First, let me share what this paper is not about. One, it is not intended to distract or detract 
from the critical discussions at C oA SS. Singapore recognizes the importance that many Members 
attach to the ongoing negotiations and will continue to support it. In fact, we have heard from many 
during our consultations, Members can walk and chew gum at the same time. Two, it is not meant 
to compete with other proposals at C oA SS. In fact, we have stated this clearly in  Paragraph 8, which 
urges Members to consider in greater detail the relevant submissions submitted to date. Given the 
challenges in the C oA SS discussions, it is important that Members continue to consider all 
dimensions of food insecurity and the steps th at we can take to address them. Three, this paper is 
certainly not meant to be a silver bullet to resolve all dimensions of the food insecurity challenges. 
Any such effort will certainly require all Members to work together to seek a win -win outcome.  
11.5.   Second, let me share what this paper is about. One, it is a modest attempt to contribute to 
an MC13 outcome. It is a response to the almost unanimous emphasis that Members have placed 
on addressing the challenges of food insecurity. Two, this proposal is targe ted at the short to medium 
term. In other words – what can we meaningfully do in the six working weeks that we have left to 
MC13? Three, this paper brings together elements that we see as realistic and credible, in areas WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 75 - 
 
  such as export restrictions, added transparency, exemptions for LDCs and increased international 
collaboration.  
11.6.   Third, let me share what this paper can be. One, this paper can be a stepping stone to build 
confidence and continue negotiations, after MC13. Two, it would send an important sig nal to the 
global community that our Ministers are able to collectively respond to the current and pressing 
challenges of food insecurity. Three, the proposals in this paper might be modest, but they are 
meaningful in making a difference to many food -insecure Members, particularly the LDCs.  
11.7.   Singapore stands ready to engage in sincere, constructive, and pragmatic discussions on this 
important issue.  
11.8.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
11.9.   We believ e a medium and long -term solution to food security challenges can only be delivered 
through a MC13 outcome that include substantive food security and livelihoods package with 
decisions on issues under negotiations in the C oA SS such as PSH, and SSM, as wel l as outcome on 
domestic support especially with regards to levelling the playing field. These are the outcomes that 
are necessary for ensuring food security in developing countries and LDCs.  
11.10.   We believe the Singapore proposal which is confined to issues of transparency and new 
disciplines on export restrictions cannot be part of a medium or long -term solution to food security 
challenges. The African Group holds this view for four important reaso ns. First, existing disciplines 
are sufficient and balanced to address export restrictions as well as to safeguard policy space when 
required to address essential food needs of Members in times of critical food shortages. Second, 
GATT Article XI and Articl e 12 of the AoA balance the obligation with the need. Any effort to increase 
obligations on removing export restrictions while not recognizing domestic needs to address food 
crisis will adversely affect this balance. Third, there is lack of hard evidence t hat freeing up exports 
will provide the needed solution to food crises and food security. Lastly, due to resource and capacity 
constraint, we are not in a position to undertake further transparency obligation.  
11.11.   In view of these, the African Group is not in a position to support this proposal. Works in the 
area of export restrictions if needed should be about how to ensure Members adhere to existing 
exports restrictions obligation.  
11.12.   The representative of Fiji, delivered the following statement:  
11.13.   We appreciate t he communication from Singapore. We commend Singapore's leadership on 
this urgent issue which affects millions of people especially in LDCs and developing Members. Like 
many SIDS, Fiji faces multiple challenges in ensuring food security and nutrition for i ts population. 
Taking guidance from the FAO, food imports outweigh food production as source of many SIDS. We 
recall here Dr. Ngozi's call at G20 Summit in Bali last year to reduce or eliminate export restrictions, 
following also on the MC12 outcome.  
11.14.   Fiji attaches great importance of fair and market -oriented agricultural trading system. Fiji 
commends the commitment of Singapore and others that any emergency measures introduced to 
address food security concerns are consistent with WTO provisions and that th ey are transparent, 
temporary, targeted and take into account the possible impact on other WTO Members. We look 
forward to action on this proposal for MC13, and that we demonstrate relevance and responsiveness 
to global food security challenges.  
11.15.   The repres entative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
11.16.   Egypt acknowledges the significance of promoting transparency in handling export 
prohibitions and restrictions. However, while transparency is crucial, it alone may not guarantee 
access of Least Develope d Countries and Non -Food Importing Developing Countries to open 
international food markets to fulfill their basic food needs.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 76 - 
 
  11.17.   Additionally, there is a need for clarification on what would constitute essential foodstuffs 
and who would have the authority to determine this —whether it is the exporting or the importing 
country.  
11.18.   Moreover, while the draft text acknowledges the multifaceted nature of food security, it lacks 
immediate steps to address vital elements crucial to food security. Instead, it defers the m atter to 
future negotiations in the context of CoA  SS. This approach overlooks existing proposals, such as 
the Public Stockholding (PSH) by the African Group and G33 ( JOB/AG/229 ) and the de minimis 
section in the African Group proposal on domestic support ( JOB/AG/242 ), which could provide 
immediate solutions.  
11.19.   The draft proposal does not mandate the expeditious and prioritized handling of these issues 
in negotiations. To ensure a comprehensive response to food insecurity, a concrete and credible 
decision in MC13  should encompass:  
− Accessibility to markets, extending beyond LDCs to include NFIDCs.  
− Granting LDCs and NFIDCs flexibility to enhance agricultural production and maintain 
stockpiles of basic foodstuffs essential for their food security.  
− Strengthening their ability to finance imports, a factor that is vaguely addressed in the 
proposed Paragraph 8 of the draft text.  
 
11.20.   Egypt asserts that the current draft falls short of addressing immediate and comprehensive 
food security needs. It lacks spec ificity on critical issues and does not prioritize existing proposals 
like PSH and de minimis. Egypt believes this document should not be the basis for discussions on 
food security.  
11.21.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
11.22.   We apprecia te Singapore's proposal. In light of the current situation, it is important to 
demonstrate the WTO's commitment to addressing food insecurity at MC13. Supply chain disruptions 
particularly affected vulnerable countries, and it is important to ensure smooth  trade in agricultural 
products as one of the factors that contributes to global food security and will complement each 
Member's domestic production.  
11.23.   Japan sees value in Singapore's proposal and appreciates its initiative. We are aware of the 
ongoing discu ssions at the CoA SS  on how to proceed with agricultural reform, including ensuring 
food security. Japan believes that all items, including issues addressed in this agenda, should be put 
on the table to pursue a comprehensive outcome, and we will continue to be engaged in the process.  
11.24.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
11.25.   We look forward to discussing this proposal in more detail. There are two other proposals at 
CoA SS on related issues. We hope that all the proponents , and us also, we are happy to join the 
conversation, that we can work together on the topic. Export restrictions have proven time and again 
to only exacerbate market volatility, often in direct conflict with their intended purpose.  They also 
undermine the  livelihoods of producers by reducing their incomes for their current production, 
creating a perverse incentive to not produce.  We welcome the proposals and hopefully we can work 
together.  
11.26.   We have heard multiple Members say that an outcome on export restriction is not viable on 
its own or is a distraction from more substantial outcomes. We urge these Members to stay 
constructively engaged on tangible outcomes that the WTO can deliver - an area that was requested 
by LDC Members for the WTO to take acti on. We hope we can engage constructively on this.  
11.27.   The representative of Tanzania  delivered the following statement:  
11.28.   Food security remains a critical challenge for developing countries , especially  LDCs and 
NFIDCs. We consider it a sensitive subject , which a s a delegation we have often referred to as a 
national security matter. We believe that countries facing greater burden of food security should 
themselves decide on suitable solution for food security , and n ot have solutions superimposed from 
outside. Spec ial safeguard mechanism, PSH and other domestic support measures can improve WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 77 - 
 
  domestic food security particularly in NFIDCs and LDCs , if implemented carefully and responsibly. 
Further, we believe that any policy space provided under  GATT Article  XI.2 and Ao A Article  12 may 
serve as an  important instrument to avert risk of encountering critical shortages of food stuff. We 
also fully subscribe to the wisdom captured in AoA , which clearly states that food security is a non -
trade concern. While we acknowledge th at trade can help ; food security should not be looked at 
from perspective from trade alone. It should r ather consider the wider array of solution to food 
insecurity challenges. A call which we also heard a few days ago from Ministers during the Ministerial  
meeting. Finally , we align with statements of the African Group.  
11.29.   The representative of the Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
11.30.   We would like to thank Singapore for surfacing this proposal at the General Council, which 
complements ongoing work in the C oA SS, and attempts to mitigate against possible trade distorting 
measures that could affect the food security of net food importing countries. The Philippines does 
support a holistic outcome on agriculture at MC13 but we also remain pragmatic that  we should be 
open to achieving tangible results in the near term.  
11.31.   We do not believe that the issue of export restrictions is a key offensive or defensive interest 
of members in agricultural negotiations. We sense that the membership generally holds a sim ilar 
perspective that it is a policy tool that must be used judiciously in only extreme and temporary 
situations. The Singapore proposal does contain key elements that help to reinforce the responsible 
use of export restrictions, such as on the notificatio n and review of export prohibitions or restrictions, 
commitment to engage in consultations, and the key commitment to refrain from imposing export 
restrictions on essential foodstuffs for least -developed countries.  
11.32.   We look forward to further engagement in  delivering concrete food security related outcomes 
at MC13.  
11.33.   The representative of Ukraine  delivered the following statement:  
11.34.   Ukraine welcomes the continued interest in export restrictions previously held within the 
framework of CoA  SS. We thank Singapore for the contribution. Combatting the aggravated food 
insecurity crisis for almost two years, as a result of Russia's invasion, Ukraine recognizes importance 
of providing timely information on export restrictions. This will enable importing countries, 
particularly LDCs and NFIDCs to diversify supply chains to minimizes threats to national food 
security.  
11.35.   Ukraine would also like to emphasize once again the importance of refraining from 
unnecessary export restrictions. In this regard, we welcome the ongoing col laborative work of like -
minded Members in CoA SS, based on proposals from Japan, the LDC Group and United Kingdom. 
Before MC13, we should focus our joint efforts on achieving a balanced  solution on agriculture. In 
this connection, we share Singapore's view s on comprehensive and meaningful reform in agriculture 
with an emphasis on substantial progressive reduction of support and protection. For this reason, 
Ukraine looks forward discussing Singapore's proposal at upcoming CoA SS meeting.  
11.36.   The representative o f China  delivered the following statement:  
11.37.   My following statement is for both item s 11 and 13.  China supports reaching food security 
outcomes for the vulnerable members at MC13. We commend Singapore and African Group's efforts 
in this regard. We see valuable elements from both papers which  could constitute the potential 
elements of MC13 integrated f ood security outcome package. We believe food security outcomes 
could be achieved if we are working in a pragmatic way and we believe some recommendations from 
both proposals  could constitute the potential elements of MC13 integrated food security outcome 
package. We hope members can engage with goodwill, show sincerity and move towards each other 
to explore practical food security outcomes in the next 2 months. For China, we reiterate that food 
security should be a part of MC13 deliverables. On export rest riction, China commends Singapore's 
continuous efforts on responding to food insecurity after the remarkable WFP outcomes at MC12.  
11.38.   We believe that the implementation of export prohibitions or restrictions in strict accordance 
with relevant WTO regulations  is crucial to ensure the stability and reliability of the global agricultural 
trade supply chain. On the basis of implementing the MC12 Ministerial Declaration on food security, WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 78 - 
 
  China supports improving the discipline of export restrictions in accordance with the current rules, 
so as to ensure that members can better fulfil the existing WTO obligations. However, the 
requirements beyond the existing rules need to be carefully studied and deliberated. China also 
stresses that the disciplines of export restri ctions should take full account of the capacity and 
resource constraints of developing Members to ensure that the relevant discipline is practical for 
them.  
11.39.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
11.40.   The European Union woul d like to thank Singapore for its communication and Ambassador 
Tan for the useful clarification in his statement. The food security challenges will remain at the top 
of our agenda in WTO. This is also natural considering a majority of WTO membership is dev eloping 
countries. In that sense we see value in this proposal.  
11.41.   An outcome on food security at MC13 should be the immediate focus considering the current 
crisis and needs of many vulnerable countries.  Elements of such outcome could include enhanced 
transpa rency on areas related to food security challenges (such as food aid, export restrictions) as 
well as clarifications of the rules on export restrictions which would limit their unjustified use.  The 
proper functioning of the markets is essential so that sup plies can reach those that need them most. 
Any measures, which restrict trade, must be limited to what is necessary and be strictly 
proportionate.  
11.42.   WTO rules allow export restrictions on food in the certain circumstances of threats to food 
security but we as WTO Members should do more on a commitment to avoid unjustified export 
restrictions and to take into account the impact on net food importing countries. Transparency and 
effective monitoring of export or restrictions are crucial for a predictable intern ational trading 
environment and international food security.  Moreover, sustainable food systems and resilient 
agricultural productions are part of the solution addressing the global food security challenges we 
are facing.  
11.43.   The representative of Ecuador  delivered the following statement:  
11.44.   This contribution on food security addresses key areas such as transparency issues relating 
to notifications, and commitments among Members to minimize trade distortions and export 
prohibitions.  Nevertheless, we note that it does not include other elements connected to food 
security that have been under discussion for months in the CoA SS . In today's world, we are facing 
a chronic problem  - food insecurity.  Unfortunately, there are few prospects for a rapid solution to 
this se rious humanitarian and human rights challenge.  Trade is not the only solution, as we were 
reminded a moment ago by the delegation of Tanzania, but it can and must be part of a solution.  
11.45.   Political, economic and sustainable development discussions, including  those concerning 
climate change, suggest the need for trade measures related to this issue that are not part of 
short- or medium -term solutions, but that contribute to long -term food security for all.  Agricultural 
trade that is stable and free of distorti ons and barriers is, in the long term, the most effective 
response to address the problem of food security.  Short -term solutions can only be effective if they 
form part of a wider process that would take place if the negotiations under Article 20 of the 
Agreement on Agriculture were implemented, covering all pillars of the negotiation in a 
comprehensive manner.  We call for this proposal to be included in the discussions of the Committee 
on Agriculture.  This contribution can play a positive role in these dis cussions and in a Committee 
where other food security -related proposals are also being taken into consideration.  
11.46.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
11.47.   On Singapore draft proposal. Addressing food security, we need to deal not only with the 
interests of net importers but with those of all other participants of the international trade, including 
the exporters. Moreover,  we stand for a systemic and balanced approach to food security in all its 
dimensions, rather than d eliberately and unjustifiably focusing on one element. We deem that global 
food security  is based on joint efforts of Members and all the Members are interdependent on each 
other in this sense. We fully agree with the fact, outlined in the communication by  Singapore that 
"high prices undermine food security and nutrition for all Members".   WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 79 - 
 
  11.48.   But some provisions of this proposal seem to be not realistic.  In particular, the commitment 
to refrain from imposing export prohibitions or restrictions on essential foo dstuff imported by least -
developed countries, even in circumstances set out in Article  XI:2(a) of the GATT 1994, seems to 
be not elaborated enough. In particular, we find it not feasible in the situation of critical shortage of 
foodstuffs in any country to  prevent it from protection of their population of famine.  We shall add, 
that we have witnessed numerous instances when the measures imposed by certain WTO Members 
had a deteriorating effect on the exports of other Members. The concerns were consistently r aised 
under the C oA review process.  
11.49.   So, we are certain that we need to tackle not only export restrictions per se but as well other 
measures having detrimental effect on food security. Any new modalities and further discussions 
should be based on this app roach so to discipline their application in the same manner as export 
restrictions. We believe that the discussion of the ER in agriculture is incomplete without addressing 
unilateral economic measures that are a huge challenge and impediment to global foo d security, 
international trade and growth.  
11.50.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
11.51.   We thank Singapore for its proposal on the immediate steps to respond to food insecurity, 
which acknowledges the current global food insecur ity and the way of addressing it. For the 
remaining limited weeks prior to MC13, it is desirable for Members to focus on addressing problems 
arising from a possible disruption of food supply chain caused by export restrictions, which lead to 
severe fluctua tions in the domestic market of importing Members, particularly the net -food importing 
Members. This is the "minimum" element for food security issues to make a meaningful contribution 
to the world. Singapore's suggestion is in line with the idea of focusi ng on a possible achievable for 
MC13. We welcome further conversations on this matter to enhance transparency and other 
disciplines for export restrictions.  
11.52.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
11.53.   Switzerland thanks Singapore f or its submission and presentation.  We agree with Singapore 
that food security has to be a focus point of our work at the WTO. The reasons for this are clear and 
demand for urgent action.  In this regard we welcome Singapore's efforts to take a leading role in 
the discussions.  Indeed, we see the submission as a valuable contribution. Many elements presented 
are relevant and need consideration.  
11.54.   However, we are of the view that the right forum to further refine the presented ideas is 
CoA SS. Most i mportantly, there are several other submissions currently presented and discussed in 
CoA SS that follow the same objective. Switzerland believes that we should look at all ideas together 
in order to find common ground and define the best way forward in a c omprehensive manner.  
11.55.   Switzerland stands ready to engage on the substance of this submission and others in 
CoA SS in order to shape an outcome that will improve global food security.  
11.56.   The representative of Mauritius  delivered the following statement:  
11.57.   We have  taken note of Singapore's submission . When taken from a net food importing 
developing country perspective, there are of course always concerns about stringent export 
restrictions that are dealt with through goodwill agreements, as such agreements however helpful, 
do not provide certainty to food deficit importers.  But we must also address the source of the problem 
that today impacts on food security and therefore directly affects those faced with food deficit. A 
solution to food insecurity must therefore b e also addressed through domestic support regulation 
and capacity to undertake stockholding when necessary.  
11.58.   We are therefore willing to engage in discussions to address what package of measures could 
constitute a food security package.  We believe the paper  that the African Group has put forward on 
NFIDCs provides a good basis for that broader discussion.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 80 - 
 
  11.59.   The representative of Senegal  delivered the following statement:  
11.60.   While export prohibitions or restrictions are not the only factors to be borne in mind in 
relation to food security, they are a very important aspect of food security for LDCs, including 
Senegal . I think this text deserves more attention because a good number of the paragraphs, 
specifically paragraphs 1 to 5, seek to strengthen and clarify exis ting provisions on export 
prohibitions and restrictions. Therefore, we believe it would be very important to discuss the matter 
further. We can truly support some of the paragraphs because current transparency provisions must 
be strengthened and clarified.  
11.61.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
11.62.   Korea would like to express our deep appreciation for Singapore's proposal. Many elements 
presented are timely and relevant. We believe that MC13 outcome needs to adequately ad dress Food 
Security and Export Restriction issues.  
11.63.   We recognize that UK and Japan have also submitted proposals on Export Restrictions in the 
CoA SS, and they are currently under discussion. Korea welcomes those contributions and hopes 
that the important components of all three papers will be appropriately reflected in the balanced 
outcome of MC13.  
11.64.   The representative of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
11.65.   Food security is a critical challenge, we all have a responsibility to address. Australia 
appreciates proposals seeking to strengthen the rules -based MTS particularly with view of enhancing 
food security. CoA SS discussions on this matter are ongoing, with substantial proposals on a range 
of matters. This includes the C airns Group pro posal JOB/AG/243  based on Costa Rica's work.  
11.66.   We in C airns Group continue to argue for a holistic approach to break the stalemate in 
agriculture. Export restrictions should absolutely  be part of this discussion in CoA SS . But narrowly 
cast proposals that address single issues only will not meaningfully address global food insecurity 
and risk distracting from the bigger challenges we need to address.  
11.67.   The representative of Mongolia  delivered the following statement:  
11.68.   Mongolia appreciates the initiative of Sin gapore and supports the Proposal of "MC13 - 
Immediate steps to respond to food insecurity". We had a brief meeting on that issue with fellow 
Members. As one of the landlocked developing countries, Mongolia hopes that the interests of the 
LLDCs must be refle cted in the works of the WTO and Ministerial decisions as the impact of the 
pandemic, current global situations are challenging LLDCs due to the geographical locations and 
other structural obstacles.  
11.69.   Mongolia proposed an input relating to LLDCs to this su bmission as follows: Specifically 
addressing the concerns of landlocked developing countries (LLDCs), we recognize the unique 
challenges they face in ensuring food security as net importers. LLDCs are vulnerable to disruptions 
in the global supply chains, and we emphasize the importance of consultations between Members to 
minimize trade distortions and ensure food security, providing exemptions for essential items when 
needed. This tailored approach aims to fortify the food security of landlocked developing  countries, 
recognizing their distinctive position in the global agricultural landscape.  
11.70.   Mongolia would like to call on the Members to attach high importance to the intangible special 
needs of food security as all of us witnessed unprecedented health chal lenges affected food security, 
recently.  
11.71.   The representative of Kazakhstan  delivered the following statement:  
11.72.   We appreciate the communication from Singapore which highlights the importance of 
minimizing the negative impact of export restrictions on agricul tural products, and the need for 
greater transparency that would contribute to addressing the food insecurity challenges faced by 
Members. We believe that this proposal could be practical and immediate solution in interest of 
NFIDCs and LDCs. At the same t ime, we would like to be clear that we do not use this proposal as WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 81 - 
 
  a replacement or undermining the broader, holistic approach to agricultural reform agenda,  which 
is being discussed in the CoA SS format, on which we hope to find a way format for MC13.  
11.73.   The representative of Israel  delivered the following statement:  
11.74.   As a net -food importing country, Food Security has always been central to Israel's 
agricultural policy. We thank Singapore for their work and constructive engagement on their proposal 
and we welc ome all discussions on food security, and specifically Export Restrictions. In our view, 
strengthening the disciplines on Export Restrictions is a significant component in achieving global 
food security. We do note that there are ongoing discussions on thi s topic in the CoA SS and we 
encourage all proponents to join forces where possible and appropriate. We stand ready to engage 
further on this and all similar proposals in order to reach an outcome at MC13 on Food Security.  
11.75.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
11.76.   We thank the delegation of Singapore for its proposal. It is, however, important to recall 
that this issue is currently being actively discussed in the context of the negotiations of the 
Committee on Agriculture in Special Session, with at least three proposals on this topic, submitted 
by the delegations of Japan, the United Kingdom and the LDC Group; but these discussions are not 
at a sufficiently advanced stage to be referred to the General Council for a decision.  
11.77.   We there fore invite the delegation of Singapore to circulate its proposal as a JOB document 
in the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session so that the proposal can be part of the current 
discussions on export restrictions.  
11.78.   MC13 must produce a holistic outcome  with the trade -offs needed to lead to consensus. We 
need to be ambitious and look forward to decisive, specific and tangible progress across all the 
negotiating pillars, and not focus solely on the short term.  
11.79.   We look forward to specific progress and wou ld not be satisfied with small "early harvest" 
packages.  
11.80.   The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of the OECS , delivered the following 
statement:  
11.81.   We are grateful to Singapore for its proposal. We find it instructive that the WTO Director -
Genera l's annual overview of developments in the international trading environment, presented on 
7 December at a meeting of the Trade Policy Review Body, indicates that trade restrictions continue 
to weigh on global trade, with persistent export restrictions con tributing to food price volatility. 
Added to this, the polycrisis environment lends greater weight to the pressing need for a discrete 
food security package at MC13.  
11.82.   In the OECS, inflation, public debt and climate change represent the antecedents for food  
insecurity. Already, all OECS countries meet the majority of their food demands through external 
sources, reflecting a considerable level of reliance on food imports. Four out of six OECS countries 
are also considered to be moderately to severely food ins ecure.  
11.83.   It is in this context that we see the Singapore proposal as containing many elements which 
we find useful. However, we believe that any final outcome has to be sensitive to the needs and 
special circumstances of Net -Food-Importing -Developing -Countr ies (NFIDCs) and it is on this point 
that we believe that the proposal has not gone far enough. We stand ready to engage constructively 
with Singapore on this.  
11.84.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
11.85.   We thank Singapore for their p roposal. At the outset, we wish to associate ourselves with 
the statement delivered on behalf of the African Group.  Nigeria believes that the WTO should 
contribute, within its mandate, to address the structural causes of food and livelihood insecurity and 
unlock Developing Countries Productive capacity. It for this reason that Nigeria under the auspices 
of the African Group is seeking MC13 outcome that include substantive food security and livelihoods WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 82 - 
 
  package that would address trade distorting domestic sup port, especially with regards to levelling 
the playing field, PSH, SSM and Cotton.  
11.86.   As indicated by the African Group, the Singapore proposal which is confined to issues of 
transparency and new disciplines on export restrictions would not address the food s ecurity 
difficulties in Developing Countries. In our view, the current disciplines on Export Restrictions both 
in the GATT (Article XI) and the AoA (Article 12) is sufficient and balanced to address export 
restrictions as well as to safeguard policy space when required to address essential food needs of 
Members in  times of critical food shortages. In addition, we are also not in a position to support 
additional transparency obligations given capacity and resource constraint.  
11.87.   We therefore call on Singapore to support efforts towards delivering substantive food 
secur ity and livelihoods package with decisions on issues under negotiations in the C oA SS such as 
Domestic Support, PSH, SSM, and Cotton at MC13.  
11.88.   The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
11.89.   We thank Singapore for presenting their proposal , and we have forwarded the paper to 
Capital for evaluation, and objective consideration.  As a net food importer and a developing country, 
Malaysia acknowledges the importance for us to address food insecurity issue. At the same time, we 
also recognize  the complexity of this issue when we try to solve it from a sole trade perspective, as 
this issue is closely linked to social interest, as well as political sensitivity.  
11.90.   In this regard, we prefer to adopting a comprehensive and holistic approach on agricultural 
reform. In addition to transparency and export restrictions, we should also advocate for broader 
measures that encompass sustainable agriculture, increased producti vity, and the development of 
resilient food systems.  
11.91.   In short, we need to strike a balance by identifying and addressing the core issues in 
agriculture; and we believe that the comprehensive approach will facilitate us to address the food 
security challen ges effectively.  
11.92.   The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement:  
11.93.   Thailand position similar to Switzerland. Appreciate and attach great importance to 
discussion of food insecurity as presented in the paper. We would like to have this disc ussion in 
holistic manner in CoA SS. This issue has many aspects, we cannot single out only export restriction 
and transparency and hope it addresses everything pertinent for food security. We look forward to 
discussing Singapore's paper in the CoA SS.  We want to also continue discussing agriculture, not 
just food security. Agriculture is the ultimate solution to food security.  
11.94.   The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement:  
11.95.   We welcome the discussions on food security, and we would like to thank Singapore for a 
valuable contribution.  We note several areas of overlap between the paper in front of us and other 
submissions in other committees, amongst others,  in the CoA  SS. We would therefore encourage 
the proponents to come together and coordi nate their efforts.  We look forward to further engaging 
in the discussions on food security towards MC13.  
11.96.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
11.97.   We share the concerns of the urgent need to address food security crises. According  to WFP, 
738 million people are facing chronic hunger. Many developing country members would not meet 
SDG 2 in current trajectory. And developing country members, including LDCs and NFIDCs, 
continues to affect  disproportionately  
11.98.   In this regard, while we no te that much of the substantive issue in the declaration is focusing 
on the export restriction issue, it is important to seek solution to the food security issue through 
more comprehensive measures Indeed, for us, food security is about having enough, affo rdable, and 
accessible food for our people.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 83 - 
 
  11.99.   This is why my delegation continues advocating for a permanent solution on PSH for food 
security purposes – which to this date remains an outstanding mandate from previous MCs.  Indeed, 
our work here in WTO must c ontribute to improving global food security. Back in MC12, we could 
agree on a Ministerial Declaration on the Emergency to Food Insecurity.  We heard the call from 
many Members during the recent TNC/Informal HoD meeting and today, including from Africa, LDC s, 
and NFIDCs – that is for MC13 to agree on a food security and livelihood package.  If we are serious 
about food security, we must heed their call – and my delegation stands ready to engage 
constructively towards achieving such an outcome.  
11.100.   The representat ive of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
11.101.   Brazil does not identify export restrictions as the main cause of high prices, excessive 
volatility, trade disruption and food and nutrition insecurity.  Unfortunately, a declaration along the 
lines proposed would not address those concerns.  WTO solutions to global food insecurity are trade -
related and require a holistic approach, involving all elements of agricultural liberalization, from 
domestic support to market access, and the creation of a productive and resilient food system.  
11.102.   Evidence points to the positive contribution to global food security that would arise from 
reducing distortions and improving market access in agriculture, as per the fundamental principles 
of the WTO.  We appreciate th e initiative has been presented as a constructive effort, but it moves 
us away from the debate that can lead to a lasting solution. In this sense, it has the effect, though 
unintended, of a red herring. The focus solely on "export restriction" will not bri ng food to the table 
of those most in need.  
11.103.   The representative of Sri Lanka  delivered the following statement:  
11.104.   Food Security is of highest priority for my country.  It goes without saying that food 
insecurity is a multifaceted issue, which need to be addres sed through holistic solutions. Even among 
NFIDCs and LDCs, we see vast diversity relating to challenges they face relating to food security. 
This was well reflected during our sixteen -month long engagement under the dedicated Work 
Programme established as  the MC12 Food Insecurity Declaration.  Members amply reflected on the 
lack of advanced technology, lack of finance, limited or no investment in R&D, limited access to 
credit;  and insurance systems. Due to all these challenges, agricultural productivity and  production 
is very low in NFIDCs and LDCs. In this context, there is an urgent need to make the agrifood 
systems of NFIDCs and LDCs more efficient, inclusive resilient and sustainable. This can be achieved 
only through enhancing agricultural production an d productivity of NFIDCs and LDCs.  
11.105.   We need to take an array of measures towards this end, which may encompass technology 
transfer, long -term financial support, technical assistance and capacity building , etc. While we do 
not deny that trade is important fo r food security of any country, we wish to mention that the AoA 
has made it clear that food security is a non -trade concern. If we are serious in finding solutions to 
the food insecurity of NFIDCs and LDCs, we need to treat it as a non -trade issue.  
11.106.   Accordi ngly, our work at the WTO should aim at concrete measures that would provide long 
lasting solutions to the food insecurity of NFIDCs and LDCs. Such measures must take into 
consideration the specific needs and challenges of NFIDCs and LDCs. In this regard w e reiterate our 
call for adopting measures to bolster the agricultural production and productivity of NFIDCs and 
LDCs.  
11.107.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
11.108.   India would like to thank the proponent for this agenda, though we would h ave preferred 
that this agenda could have come in CoA SS , like the proposals of the UK, Japan, and LDCs. But 
since it is there before us, let me comment on the proposal.  So, first of all, let us understand that 
export restriction comes mostly in the supply -constrained scenario. And in the supply -constrained 
scenario, if you are not imposing the export restrictions, that means you are allowing your own 
people to be vulnerable to the supply -side shock.  
11.109.   At the same time, if you open up without any restriction  or without any monitoring, it will 
lead to crowding out. This is exactly what happened in the first and second quarter of 2022. In the 
crisis, when India, which is not a traditional wheat -exporting country, saw a 400  per cent  rise in the WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 84 - 
 
  export of wheat. Incidentally, most of that wheat was going to one of the proponents of the removal 
of export restrictions. This wheat was not going to the bowl and plates of LDCs or NFIDCs, but it 
was going to the futures and options contractors and to those countries who  can afford to have deep 
pockets to order more than their food requirement.  
11.110.   So let me give you three scenarios in honor  of the proponent. As part of the safety 
instructions on flights, in cases of low oxygen, passengers are asked to cover themselves first  before 
assisting infants. It doesn't mean that the mother, the parent, or the adult passenger is not 
concerned about the well -being of the infant. But the instruction is that first, you wear your oxygen 
mask and then try to help others. So, export restric tion is one such example.  
11.111.   The second example is in the case of a car. If you don't allow the brake in a car, that means 
the car will never speed. So, the brake is not to reduce the speed, but it gives you freedom to 
accelerate. And if you remove that expo rt restriction from the toolbox, which is available under GATT 
and A oA, it means you are not allowing trade to happen freely. In the absence of an export restriction 
tool, everyone will be too conservative to allow trade to happen.  
11.112.   And last but not least,  we have seen in the previous agenda that in the name of duty -free 
quota, there is free access to big tech platforms, but we were saying that it is for the MSMEs of least 
developed countries and developing countries. In the same way, in the name of futures  and option 
traders, we are saying it is for LDCs and NFIDCs, rather LDCs and NFIDC would get benefit in the 
case of export restriction if the G2G agreement can take place where due to availability of assured 
supply, affordable rate and transact serving av ailable currency may help them.  
11.113.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
11.114.   The food security challenge is acute. The WTO has a clear role to play in responding to the 
food security crisis. This is an issue our Ministers are going to want to focus on when they reach Abu 
Dhabi, so it is right that we are considering what we can do here. That said there are live discussions 
happening in the CoA  SS and we should continue discussing Singapore's ideas there. It is cle ar we 
have to progress negotiations towards a fair and market -oriented trading system, including on 
reducing trade -distorting support, which would be beneficial for food security globally.  
11.115.   We believe the efforts and progress made this year in CoA  SS ought  to allow us to be more 
specific and ambitious in the details of what is possible than is currently contained in this proposal.   
As part of this wider work in the CoA  SS it is clear that we need to begin to tackle export restrictions.  
The UK has put forw ard a proposal, alongside proposals by the LDC Group and Japan. We see 
complementarity between those ideas and as encouraged by the CoA  SS Chair we are actively 
engaged on bringing together the key elements of all three proposals. We plan to bring our idea s 
back to the membership in January, and we want to work with all Members, including Singapore, on 
what might be possible.  
11.116.   Tackling this issue needs to be part of a holistic outcome on agriculture at MC13. As we 
have said before, tackling export restricti ons is not a substitute for progressing agriculture reform. 
There are high ambitions across the membership across all files on agriculture reform. We welcome 
and fully support the efforts by the CoA  SS Chair to find a way through this challenging negotiati on. 
As we said at TNC, let's now intensify discussions, including at HoD level, to ensure we deliver on 
Agriculture at MC13.  
11.117.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
11.118.   We thank all Members who have provided the views on our communi cation. The points 
have been carefully noted. Let me just be brief and make three points.  
11.119.   First, it is evident that there is broad recognition that it is important for MC13 to address 
the global food security challenges. Food security is of universal conc ern to all Members and will 
benefit from a broader, more sincere and constructive conversation in the General Council. It does 
not help the conversation if we use spurious examples to back spurious arguments. I think Members 
would be better served if we co me together and agree on the importance of delivering an outcome 
at MC13. As I have  stated in my opening presentation, this Communication is not intended to be a WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 85 - 
 
  silver bullet. We have six weeks left. We must be pragmatic, realistic, and try our best to de liver an 
outcome that will serve the systemic interests of the WTO.  
11.120.   Second, I urge Members to avoid allowing the pursuit of the perfect to become an enemy 
of the good.  
11.121.   Third, there is evidently a trust deficit which some Members had highlighted earlier; a nd 
this deep -seated mistrust among Members, underpins an unfounded fear that addressing Export 
Restrictions to ease pressing food insecurity challenges will result in other important issues being 
left unaddressed. This is a zero -sum mindset that will not a llow us to make progress.  
11.122.   Singapore will continue to work closely with Members to refine the proposal, and we 
welcome any constructive feedback.  
11.123.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
12  PROPOSED MINISTERIAL DECLARATION FOR THE THIRTEENTH MINISTERI AL 
CONFERENCE: STRENGTHENING REGULATORY COOPERATION TO REDUCE TECHNICAL 
BARRIERS TO TRADE – COMMUNICATION FROM CAMEROON; CHINA; JORDAN; MACAO, 
CHINA; MYANMAR AND SEYCHELLES  
12.1.   The Chairperson  said that t he following item "Proposed Ministerial Declaration for  the 
Thirteenth Ministerial Conference: Strengthening Regulatory Cooperation to Reduce Technical 
Barriers to Trade – Communication from Cameroon; China; Jordan; Macao, China; Myanmar and 
Seychelles" has been included in the agenda at the request of the del egation of China , on behalf of 
the co -sponsors.  
12.2.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
12.3.   The draft Ministerial declaration prepared for this agenda item has been circulated in 
document WT/GC/W/915 , which is currently co -sponsored by 41 Members. Early this morning, we 
received confirmation from Switzerland and Australia for joining us as new co -sponsors. Now there 
are 43. It is very encouraging,  and we are more than happy to add more members' names to the 
proposal after this GC meeting. On behalf of all the co -sponsors, I would like to give a brief 
introduction to our proposal.  
12.4.   First, the purpose of this Ministerial Declaration is to highlight the importance of one aspect 
of WTO work that is sometim es overlooked. In the ministerial context, we are used to focusing on 
our negotiating agenda, but another important element of WTO's work is cooperation and dialogue 
that takes place in the regular Committees. In the regulatory area, this is of growing imp ortance. 
Governments around the world are increasingly using regulations and standards to tackle some of 
the most pressing challenges of our time.  
12.5.   Indeed, we, as WTO Members, need to cooperate more if we want to effectively tackle the 
challenges ahead of us. I am thinking of health matters, or the environment and climate change, 
and of the digital economy. Regulatory cooperation helps ensure that we together address these 
important challenges although our regulatory systems may sometimes be different. In d oing so, we 
need to be transparent, we need to share good practices, we need to promote capacity building. And 
we need to strengthen cooperation at the multilateral level. This is what the declaration is about.  
12.6.   Second, let me make some important clarifica tions about what this TBT Ministerial Declaration 
is not about. The declaration will not add to or detract from obligations or rights of members under 
the TBT Agreement. That is perhaps obvious, but I want to make it clear. The declaration intends to 
spotlight the importance and, indeed, the increasing relevance, of work on regulations that affect 
trade. It is remarkable that the TBT Agreement, now almost 30 years old – due to the constructive 
engagement of Members in its Committee - is still effective in a ddressing emerging global challenges 
faced by all of us today.  
12.7.   We, the co -sponsors, seek to emphasize the importance of regulatory cooperation and 
transparency in reducing unnecessary barriers to trade, including with respect to crucial emerging 
regulator y issues such as the protection of the environment, the emergence of the digital economy WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 86 - 
 
  and public health matters. We underscore the value of transparency and call for further enhancement 
of our digital tools, such as ePing and eAgenda. Finally, we emphas ize the importance of technical 
assistance and capacity building on TBT matters.  
12.8.   My third and last point , the TBT Ministerial Declaration will not create any new work streams 
for the TBT Committee. As I mentioned, the intention is to put a "ministerial spo tlight" on the 
importance of regulatory cooperation at the multilateral level. The Declaration should push us to 
become more efficient. The substance of this work, of course, is left to the technical experts in the 
TBT Committee.  
12.9.   Finally, as the Director -General said when speaking at the launch of "Trade Day" last week in 
Dubai , "We need to use every weapon in our arsenal to fight the climate crisis". International 
cooperation on regulatory matters in the context of the WTO's regular work is a powerful but  less 
known tool in the WTO toolbox. It helps us bridge differences and avoid trade friction. We certainly 
need this today. It is time that this be recognized at the Ministerial level.  
12.10.   If adopted, the TBT declaration will be a good demonstration to all st akeholders that the 
WTO has the tools and capabilities to address new challenges, and also to demonstrate the political 
will of WTO members to address those challenges together.  Let me stop here and invite my 
co-sponsors to share more insightful views on i t.  
12.11.   The representative of Cameroon  delivered the following statement:  
12.12.   Cameroon wishes, in its capacity as co -sponsor, to express its support for the draft 
Ministerial declaration on strengthening regulatory cooperation to reduce technical barriers to trade , 
in view of the major importance of this matter within our  National Development Strategy, particularly 
in relation to the development of our exports, import substitution and the reduction of our trade 
deficit.  
12.13.   We acknowledge that the work of the WTO TBT  Committee has been instrumental in 
advancing the implementation of the TBT Agreement and maintaining the TBT Agreement dynamic 
since 1995, particularly through the Triennial Review process.  
12.14.   My delegation is of the view that the TBT Agreement provides a unique multilateral 
framework for regulatory cooperation that is essential to avoid and reduce unnecessary barriers to 
trade. We note, for example, that close regulatory cooperation among Membe rs was fundamental in 
addressing the COVID -19 pandemic by facilitating trade through the reduction or suspension of 
unnecessary regulatory barriers, the use of international standards or the temporary recognition of 
multiple standards and the reduction of unnecessary costs.  
12.15.   By following a constructive approach, we hope that a key step can be taken at MC13 to 
ensure that  regulatory cooperation helps to avoid and reduce unnecessary barriers to trade; 
cooperation assists Members in meeting cross -border and glo bal challenges, and builds confidence 
between trading partners through mutual understanding and dialogue; cooperation contributes to 
the development of effective and efficient technical regulations and avoids regulatory differences 
and unnecessary divergen ce.  
12.16.   The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of the OECS , delivered the following 
statement:  
12.17.   Technical regulation, standards and conformity assessment procedures can often be barriers 
to global trade. Developing countries that lack sophisticat ed systems to comply with TBT 
requirements can find themselves locked out of important markets. In this regard, we see a role for 
regulatory cooperation, exchange of information, transparency, predictability and technical 
assistance and capacity building a nd international recognition arrangements for accreditation. The 
proposal from the co -sponsors takes us in the right direction. We hope it will form the basis of a 
credible Ministerial declaration at MC13.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 87 - 
 
  12.18.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
12.19.   We want to thank China for their proposal and for their presentation today.  We are pleased 
to work with Members on this proposal and it is great to hear new co -sponsors coming onboard. This 
declaration highlights the imp ortant and varied work of the TBT Committee, in facilitating trade, and 
supporting collaboration. In particular it invites Members to participate in this work, with a view to 
improve results through, and within the TBT Committee and to foster more internat ional regulatory 
cooperation.  This document sends a positive message about multilateralism and what it can deliver, 
during and after MC13. So, we welcome and look forward to discussing with potential co -sponsors 
and to help Members to understand this decla ration, so once again we can deliver this one.  
12.20.   The representative of the Seychelles  delivered the following statement:  
12.21.   Seychelles is pleased to co -sponsor the proposed Ministerial Declaration on Strengthening 
Regulatory Cooperation to Reduce Technical Bar riers to Trade and acknowledges the significant value 
of the TBT Agreement within the framework of the WTO. We also commend the ongoing efforts of 
the Committee in consistently advancing its implementation whilst aiming to keep it dynamic and 
relevant.  In line with this, the Seychelles, in considering our diversification ambitions, appreciates 
the proposed Declaration's inclusion of regulatory cooperation and dialogue between Members to 
reduce unnecessary barriers to trade, amongst its other elements.  
12.22.   Impor tantly, the proposal includes technical assistance and capacity building to address the 
challenges faced by developing and least developed country Members in this area, continued 
discussions on which are encouraged to ensure that these Members are able to take full advantage 
of the Agreement.  With this, we hope that the proposed Declaration is well received by the General 
Council  
12.23.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
12.24.   I would like to express my gratitude to Chinese d elegation with which we had extensive 
bilateral engagement and from which we received clarifications regarding the goals of the draft 
declaration as well as specific wordings used in the text. We note that prime objectives of the 
proposed declaration are t o raise political awareness about the importance of the work done by the 
Committee on technical barriers to trade and reconfirm the continued relevance and importance of 
the TBT Agreement. We also note that the proposed declaration will not create any new work streams 
for the TBT Committee and will not affect the balance of right and obligations of WTO Members under 
the TBT Agreement. In this context, Russia supports  the draft declaration as proposed by China and 
other co -sponsors.  
12.25.   The representative of the  European Union  delivered the following statement:  
12.26.   The European Union thanks China for putting forward this proposal for a Ministerial 
Declaration and working with interested members on further improvements to the text.  The 
European Union has provided comm ents with a view to streamlining the text and ensuring synergy 
with the ongoing work of the TBT Committee.  The European Union is of the view that this declaration 
could be a positive outcome for MC13, reaffirming the importance of the work of the TBT to re duce 
non-tariff barriers to trade, so the European Union has decided to become a co -sponsor.  
12.27.   The representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela  delivered the following statement:  
12.28.   We thank China for submitting the draft Ministerial Declaration on St rengthening Regulatory 
Cooperation to Reduce Technical Barriers to Trade, which Venezuela is pleased to co -sponsor as part 
of its efforts to participate constructively in the WTO and as a firm believer in the importance of a 
robust multilateral trading sys tem. Our delegation appreciates that the draft declaration encourages 
Members to strengthen regulatory cooperation, promote the sharing of information and experiences, 
and enhance regulatory transparency and coherence, so that emerging challenges, such as climate 
change, sustainable development and the digital economy, can be addressed by working together. 
We therefore urge all delegations to support this draft declaration, which will significantly contribute 
to our work on technical barriers to trade.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 88 - 
 
  12.29.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
12.30.   The TBT Agreement provides a key framework for trade policies to address emerging global 
challenges such as climate change and digital economy. In this regard, TBT -related work and 
international co operation have become increasingly more important and this proposal will be able to 
give political momentum to them. We have engaged in the discussions to develop and streamline 
the original proposal. Japan considers it important to ensure the transparency  in technical 
regulations and conformity assessment procedures in each Member.  Japan, as a co -sponsor of this 
proposal, calls on each Member to positively consider this proposal as an MC13 outcome.  
12.31.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
12.32.   We thank China and the co -sponsoring Members for their proposed TBT Ministerial 
Declaration and are glad to be a co -sponsor ourselves as of now.  We welcome the idea of this 
Ministerial Declaration emphasizing the importance of the TBT Committee in addressing modern 
global trade challenges such as tackling climate change, the digital economy and global health 
pandemics.  Hence, we agree with China and other Members that it is important to draw the attention 
of Ministers to the invaluable contributi ons of the TBT Committee in removing barriers to trade and 
support the proposal circulated.  Switzerland is therefore happy to co -sponsor this draft Ministerial 
Declaration.  
12.33.   The representative of the Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
12.34.   The Philip pines thanks China and co -sponsors for this draft Ministerial Declaration. We 
recognize the outstanding work of the TBT Committee, and we welcome initiatives that further 
improve collaboration among WTO Members. We acknowledge that regulatory cooperation a mong 
our authorities is key to resolving many issues among WTO Members, and the Philippines is 
supportive of all the elements contained in the draft Ministerial Declaration, particularly the early 
exchange of comments on draft regulations, increased transp arency, further enhancing the use of 
digital tools, and TACB.  
12.35.   All these initiatives, in our view will further improve the functioning of the TBT Agreement 
as we face new regulatory challenges in the areas of climate change, the digital economy, and global  
health. More importantly, it is our hope that this increased regulatory cooperation will reduce the 
Specific Trade Concerns that the committee needs to address. We look forward to this proposal 
progressing towards MC13.  
12.36.   The representative of Jordan  delive red the following statement:  
12.37.   Jordan support s this proposal to Strengthen Regulatory Cooperation to Reduce Technical 
Barriers to Trade, the adoption of this draft TBT declaration will contribute to demonstrating the 
efforts excreted by the WTO members to enhance trade and welfare globally.  Also, my delegation 
would like to thank and welcome the interests and comments by all Members on this proposal, which 
are worth discussing and will be taken into consideration.  
12.38.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
12.39.   We commend China for t he proposed declaration and Singapore is pleased to be a co -
sponsor. First, this is a timely and forward -looking initiative that provides the political impetus to 
strengthen regulatory cooperation. It affirms the importance of cooperation and development, and 
adoption of international standards to reduce regulatory divergence, businesses' compliance costs, 
and market fragmentation. Second, the proposed Declaration seeks to enhance Members' 
notification procedures, for example, through the use of digital too ls. This will contribute to greater 
transparency of Members' TBT measures and facilitate cooperation in regulatory development. Third, 
the draft Declaration also seeks to strengthen the functioning the TBT Committee. Hence, we look 
forward to the Declarati on being adopted at MC13.  
12.40.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
12.41.   Brazil has been engaging at the TBT Committee and informally with China to better 
understand the scope and implications of this proposal. We definitely agree with the  proponents on WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 89 - 
 
  its underlying purposes . We are in favor of strengthening regulatory cooperation and of raising the 
awareness of the importance of the work of the TBT Committee. We thank China for the clarifications 
about the potential impact on the workflo w of the TBT Committee. We are considering positively the 
possibility of supporting the proposal. It would be helpful to all potential co -sponsors to have more 
opportunity to discuss it, for instance, with dedicated consultations organized by the Chair of the 
TBT Committee.  
12.42.   The representative of New Zealand  delivered the following statement:  
12.43.   New Zealand is pleased to join this proposal as a co -sponsor. We see it as a useful initiative 
to highlight positively the substantial  contributions  of work of WTO bodies can play in strengthening 
the MTS. Non -tariff barriers are one of the biggest challenges for Members and the work of the TBT 
Committee is of real importance to address these. We welcome the recognition that regulatory 
cooperation and  transparency are key principles in this regard. Going forward, we look forward to 
further discussions with Members on this proposal and on practical ways to advance the ideas it 
outlines.  
12.44.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following  statement:  
12.45.   Korea expresses its appreciation to China for taking the initiative to put forward a meaningful 
proposal.  In response to rapidly evolving  challenges, including the rise in technical barriers to trade, 
Korea firmly believes that the relevance of  the WTO TBT Agreement is greater than ever. Enhancing 
transparency and strengthening international regulatory cooperation are crucial. So far, the TBT 
Agreement, along with SPS Agreement, has played an important role in the everyday operation of 
this hous e. Korea believes that drawing our ministers' attention to this issue at MC13 would be 
significantly beneficial in promoting and further enhancing the work of the TBT Committee, as well 
as continuing the implementation of the Agreement to meet our contempo rary challenges. In this 
regard, expressing our support for the proposal, Korea looks forward to positive consideration from 
other Members.  
12.46.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
12.47.   We thank the delegation of China and the co -spons oring Members for sharing the proposal 
and their statements. The need to address various issues linked to the environment, health and 
safety among others has seen the emergence of various measures. While some of these measures 
may have legitimate objective , they can act as barriers to trade due to their onerous costs for 
compliance especially for resource -constrained countries. The elements in this draft declaration aim 
to bring predictability and transparency in TBT measures. We are positively engaged with  the 
delegation of China and look forward to making  positive contributions.  
12.48.   The representative of Kazakhstan  delivered the following statement:  
12.49.   We thank China and co -sponsors for proposal. I am pleased to announce Kazakhstan is ready 
to support the propos al. 
12.50.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
12.51.   We thank China and other co -sponsors for tabling this proposal. We would also like to thank 
the delegation of China for their active bilateral engagement as well as the presentation of the paper 
on TBT to the Committee. This subject matter is very close to one of the pillars of the G20 Trade 
and Investment Working Group during our presidency. Our capital is examining it, and we will be 
engaging on this with China.  
12.52.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
12.53.   China appreciates all comments and interventions, in particular those of support and positive 
statements. It is encouraging and gives us confidence that confidence -building on this proposal is 
accelerating. China and oth er co -sponsors will work with other Members to ensure this broadly 
supported proposal will be harvested at MC13.  
12.54.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 90 - 
 
  13  DRAFT MINISTERIAL DECISION ON PROMOTING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION AND 
TRADE IN NFIDCS AND LDCS - REQUEST FROM THE AFRICAN GROUP  
13.1.   The Chairperson  invited the delegation of Cameroon to introduce, on behalf of the African 
Group, the item "Draft Ministerial Decision on Promoting Agricultural Production and Trade in NFIDCs 
and LDCs" .  
13.2.   The representative o f Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
13.3.   We thank you for availing us this opportunity to present our proposed Draft Ministerial 
Decision on Promoting Agricultural Production and Trade in NFIDCs And LDCs.  As we speak, Africa, 
and some Developing Countries are on the throes of a food crisis not seen before in recent times. 
Food insecurity is higher for developing countries, especially NFIDCs and LDCs, as they are unable 
to provide enough support to develop their a gricultural sector, given the unfair WTO rules that 
constrain their policy space. Furthermore, they also do not have enough financial resources to import 
food from a concentrated and volatile global market. We believe in the context of the persistent 
state of global food insecurity that has disproportionately impacted NFIDCs and LDCs, it is of critical 
importance that MC13 delivers credible outcome that would avail NFIDCs and LDCs policy space 
needed to strengthen domestic production and enhance their parti cipation in global trade.  
13.4.   The African Group Proposal has five elements that seeks to enhance LDCs and NFIDCs 
agriculture production and productivity; accessibility to food markets: access to finance for imports 
and enhancement of production; the productive  capacity as well as transparency of Food Aid 
programmes and Export credit, guarantee and insurance initiatives.  The first element centered  to 
policy space that would enable NFIDCs and LDCs to provide AMS support for basic food stuff in 
excess of their app licable de -minimis limit in situations where they are net importers with imports 
accounting for greater than 45 per cent of domestic net food availability, in each year of the 
immediately preceding five calendar year period for which data is available; or in situation of food 
crisis when, for a month where the average monthly import price for that product exceeds a trigger 
price of 130% of the base period defined in the proposal. LDCs and NFIDC would revert to applicable 
de-minimis level when the situations  that necessitated them to exceed their applicable de -minimis 
level improves or ceases to exist.  
13.5.   The second element which borders on enhancing accessibility to food markets centres on how 
to lessen the effects of Export Restrictions on LDCs and NFIDCs impo rters. It also contains a 
reaffirmation by Members to provide international food aid to LDCs and NFIDCs. Furthermore, it 
seeks to clarify the rules on repayment term in case of exceptional circumstances under para . 17 of 
the Nairobi Decision on Export Comp etition by proposing a 54- and 72 -months  extension of the time 
frame. The proposal also seeks to extend the benefits under Article 9.4 of the Agreement on 
Agriculture in respect of the export subsidies to 2050 for LDCs and NFIDCs as against the 2030 
deadli ne enshrined in paragraph 8 of the Nairobi decision.  
13.6.   The third element centered  on international compensatory financing mechanism to finance 
normal levels of commercial imports of basic foodstuffs by LDCs and NFIDCs while the fourth is on 
enhancing transpa rency regarding food aid and export credit, guarantee, and insurance initiatives. 
The fifth element centered  on fostering WTO partnership with relevant international and regional 
organizations to explore funding mechanism to improve the agricultural produc tive capacities, 
infrastructure, and access to agricultural inputs of NFIDCs and LDCs.  
13.7.   This proposal contains decisions on constructive measures that would strengthen domestic 
production and faster  access to basic food stuff for NFIDCs and LDCs. In our view, the decisions 
contained therein are part of the solution to the food insecurity situ ations in LDCs and NFIDCs. The 
proposal is without prejudice to other flexibilities identified through the work conducted in the Special 
Committee set up under the mandate of paragraph s 8 and 9 of the "Ministerial Declaration on 
Emergency Responses to Food  Insecurity" on which negotiations with the objective to reach an 
outcome by MC14 are envisaged.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 91 - 
 
  13.8.   The representative of Djibouti , on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
13.9.   The agricultural potential of our countries is underutilized in particular because of 
technological constraints and the fact that the vast majority of our producers are small or semi -
subsistence farmers who remain very vulnerable to external shocks.  Indeed, agricultural production 
and the supply chain have been disrupt ed in recent years due to the COVID -19 pandemic and more 
recently the food and energy crises associated with the conflict in Ukraine. The periods of soaring 
prices that we have experienced intermittently since 2007 have also enormously weakened our 
economi es. Now the major challenge for LDCs is to improve domestic agricultural production to build 
resilience and long -term preparedness against future crises and other supply chain disruptions, while 
ensuring product availability and affordability of basic food s, at affordable prices to meet our food 
security needs.  
13.10.   Against this background, we urge Members to consider positively our draft decision 
contained in document JOB/AG/251  as well requesting that countries net exporters of the food 
product affected by an exp ort prohibition or restriction measure refrain from applying this measure 
to LDCs and NFIDCs importing such products for their domestic consumption needs.  We also support 
a permanent solution on public stockholding covering future programmes for LDCs.  
13.11.   The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
13.12.   We would like to express our strong support and commendation for the proposal submitted 
by the African Group aimed at promoting agricultural production and trade in Net Food Importing 
Developing Countries (NFIDCs) and Least Developed Countries (LDCs). This proposal, as articulated 
in the draft ministerial decision, is a crucial step towards addressing the pressing issue of food 
insecurity faced by many vulnerable countries, particularly those heav ily reliant on food imports.  
13.13.   The significance of this proposal lies in its timely response to the growing challenges posed 
by global crises, including the COVID -19 pandemic and geopolitical instability, which have 
exacerbated food insecurity, especially fo r NFIDCs and LDCs. The proposal recognizes the limitations 
of existing measures and underscores the need for practical solutions to bridge the gaps in efforts 
to meet the food needs of these countries.  
13.14.   The African Group's proposal demonstrates a comprehens ive understanding of the 
challenges faced by NFIDCs and LDCs in the context of agricultural reform, as undertaken under the 
mandate of the AoA. It acknowledges the specific vulnerabilities of these countries, particularly those 
with net imports accounting for a significant portion of domestic net food availability. The proposal 
tends to level the playing field between those who have serious challenges and limited flexibility and 
those who are significant producers and exporters and enjoy humongous flexibili ties. The proposed 
decision reflects a balanced and pragmatic approach to enhancing food security.  
13.15.   Furthermore, the recognition of the non -trade concern of food security is pivotal. 
Unfortunately, we were unable to reach a practical outcome following para 8 of the food insecurity 
decision's dedicated work Program. Therefore, we believe that this proposal aligns with the mandate 
outlined in the Ministerial Declaration on Emergency Responses to Food Insecurity and underscores 
the relevance of the WTO in addre ssing critical issues beyond trade. Time has come for the General 
Council to take this matter up and deal with it based on its urgency. This initiative reflects the WTO's 
commitment to fostering global cooperation and leveraging its mandate to contribute m eaningfully 
to the well -being of our countries.  
13.16.   Egypt believes that endorsing this proposal is not only a moral imperative but also aligns 
with the principles of solidarity and shared responsibility among members. Food security is a basic 
human right, and addressing it requires collective action that transcends traditional trade 
negotiations. We urge all members of the General Council to support and adopt this proposal, 
recognizing its importance in addressing the urgent and escalating challenges faced by N FIDCs and 
LDCs.  
13.17.   We call upon the G eneral Council  to take this matter up to the ministers who should be able 
to deal with it based on its urgency and sensitivity. Food availability, accessibility and affordability 
is a national security issue that almost does not need to always be based on technical, unproductive 
discussions.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 92 - 
 
  13.18.   The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of the OECS , delivered the following 
statement:  
13.19.   The OECS thanks the African Group for its communication. As WTO Members classified a s 
net food importing developing countries, the OECS States imports a large share of the food that we 
utilize with some countries importing more than 80 per cent of total food consumption. Meanwhile, 
output from the agricultural sector has been declining si nce 1990, both in an absolute sense and as 
a percentage of gross domestic product. Furthermore, OECS countries have a low ration of cultivated 
land - suggesting a fundamental challenge for us to meet domestic food demand. Our estimates 
suggest that if all lands counted under cultivation in the OECS were used for domestic food needs 
there will at most be sufficient to feed only one fifth of the OECS population.  
13.20.   Notwithstanding the challenges, we are aiming to deploy a combination of shared knowledge, 
best p ractices, research and development, innovation and the facilitation of agricultural trade, 
finance and investment to facilitate agricultural transformation in the OECS. This background 
underscores the importance that we attach to the proposal from the Afri can Group of which we are 
broadly supportive. We look forward to future constructive engagements to deliver an outcome by 
MC13.  
13.21.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
13.22.   We associate ourselves with the statement delivered on behalf of the African Group on this 
issue. In the context of the persistent state of global food insecurity that has a disproportionate 
impact on developing economies especially NFIDCs and LDCs, we believe the WTO should within its 
mandate proffer solution s that would strengthen NFIDCs and LDCs domestic production and enhance 
their participation in global trade.  
13.23.   The proposal contains decision on policy space to augment production and productivity in 
NFIDC and LDCs to buttress against the global market uncer tainties and volatilities, which is itself 
contributed by the flawed and inequitable AoA rules. The decision would also foster access to basic 
food stuff for NFIDCs and LDCs. We believe the decision adopted would be part of the solution to 
the food insecur ity situations in LDCs and NFIDCs.  We call on Members to support the draft decision.  
13.24.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
13.25.   The European Union would like to thank Nigeria and the African Group for their submission.  
The paper proposes several flexibilities for LDCs and NFIDCs related to a food security crisis. We are 
reviewing this submission in detail.  Nevertheless, I would like to make some preliminary comments 
on some of the elements proposed.  
13.26.   Considering the ideas on a possible exemption for LDCs and NFIDCs on the use of their 
domestic support limits, this is an element that could be considered in the context of the reform of 
trade -distorting support disciplines, which is one of our key priorities in the negotiation. I n relation 
to the proposal on export restrictions, we are still analyzing  the ideas in the submission. But in 
principle, the European Union is in favor of any initiatives leading to the limitation of the use of 
export -restricting measures, which may in par ticular have a negative impact on importing Members.  
13.27.   The European Union naturally supports the reaffirmation of the rules agreed in Nairobi on 
the conditions under which international food aid is granted with a view to limiting trade distortions. 
The pape r also points at the shortcomings of transparency on food aid. The European Union agrees 
that this is a problem that needs to be addressed.  
13.28.   It is important not to consider ideas that could result in backsliding on the provisions and 
disciplines agreed in N airobi regarding export subsidies and measures with equivalent effect. The 
European Union remains open to engaging with the African Group, LDC, and NFIDCs.  
13.29.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
13.30.   We wish to highlight the importanc e of the tools that already exist under the Agreement on 
Agriculture, which allow Members enhanced productivity and resilience, through investment in 
research, innovation and technology, and which do not have any relative or absolute limits under WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 93 - 
 
  the curre nt rules. Domestic support and possible flexibilities for specific products are part of the 
proposals made by both the African Group and the Cairns Group in the CoA  SS, and these discussions 
have not developed enough for the issue to be referred up to the General Council as a proposal that 
has never been submitted to the CoA  SS and is being circulated at the last minute.  
13.31.   Many of these elements were included in other proposals by certain delegations from the 
African Group, which were unsuccessful and would be unlikely to lead to consensus in a Ministerial 
Declaration. The report by the Working Group on Food Security is yet to be adopted, not because of 
a lack of political will or commitment among non -proponents, but because one Member insists on 
legitimizing  its policies on direct government -to-government exports.  
13.32.   We further recall that the category of NFIDCs should be revised to establish more granularity. 
We note with concern that the category of NFIDCs currently includes large exporters of, inter alia, 
rice, wheat and wheat flour, hard grains, oilseeds, vegetable oils and sugar, simply because they 
are net importers. Around 70 Members are included in the category, which is equivalent to 41 per 
cent of the membership.  
13.33.   We invite the African Group to review the parts of this proposal that spark sensitivity and 
re-submit the proposal as a JOB document to the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session so 
that the Committee can be part of the ongoing discussions, rather than trying to force a political 
decision  without the technical discussion necessary to reach consensus.  
13.34.   The representative of Sri Lanka  delivered the following statement:  
13.35.   Sri Lanka thanks the African Group for submitting this very important Draft Ministerial 
Decision.  We had in -depth deliberations on food security issues of NFIDCs and LDCs for over sixteen 
months at the dedicated Work Programme established under the CoA. Ho wever, we could not deliver 
anything on the food security issues of the NFIDCs and LDCs as mandated by our Ministers.  
13.36.   This does not mean that our path is closed. We need to inform this to our Ministers and 
request for their immediate intervention on this m atter. In this context, the Draft Ministerial Decision 
is indeed a timely submission.  The Draft Decision has well captured the most pertinent elements 
related to food security challenges of the NFIDCs and LDCs. Therefore, we believe this Ministerial 
decisi on could be one of the deliverables at MC13.  
13.37.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
13.38.   India would like to thank Nigeria for submitting the proposal and Cameroon for introducing 
it on behalf of the Africa n Group. We are studying this p roposal, and certainly, this is a step forward 
in taking the work under the work program, set up under the mandate of paragraph eight of the 
Ministerial Decision, and this certainly has some workable and implementable content, which would 
actually result i n giving some relief to LDCs and net food -importing developing countries. We will 
constructively engage with the African Group on these issues.  
13.39.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
13.40.   Like others, we would note that we on ly received this a couple of days ago , so we are still in 
the process of reviewing it. I will say that we agree that there is an urgent need to enhance Members 
agricultural productivity and resiliency, we  also agree that there is an urgent need to enhance 
accessibility of food and we agree that there is a need to enhance transparency of all forms of 
agricultural trade policy. Of course, the question is how we move from agreeing to those principles 
to agreeing to tangible outcomes in the agriculture negotiat ions. Over the past year within the 
Committee on Agriculture, Members have heard from experts from around the world on the issue of 
food security and we have discussed Members ' own experiences and what we have repeatedly heard 
from experts was not the need for rolling back WTO rules but rather adherence to the rules and 
strengthening the rules.  
13.41.   Again, with that, I just got a copy of this today , so I have not read it but in just  skimming 
it, I know that the items that are included in here are items that are being discussed in the CoA SS  
as part of the broader agriculture reform and so we hope that the African Group will bring this 
proposal to the CoA SS,  so that they can be discu ssed in those conversations. There are other WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 94 - 
 
  proposals on the table, and we do think that that would be the appropriate place to start this 
conversation . As I have noted before in an earlier item, we are very keen on the issues and some of 
the proposals by  the LDCs with respect to agriculture and also, we have been very engaged in the 
work programme , which as Paraguay mentioned there is a report that has not been able to be 
adopted for the reasons that were explained. We understand the issues and we are kee n on working 
towards a positive resolution to all these issues, but they need to be done in the holistic 
conversations that we hope to be having in the CoA SS . 
13.42.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
13.43.   We welcome the s ubmission by the African Group. As far as the Working Group on food 
security, established in June 2022, was unable to adopt the final report we suppose the initiative 
presented by the African Group has the potential to fill this gap. However,  a number of e lements in 
the proposal are related to the traditional agricultural agenda and thus in our view require discussion 
in the context of the comprehensive agricultural reform.  Nevertheless, our delegation is ready to 
engage in the future discussion with the Af rican Group on their proposal.  
13.44.   The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
13.45.   Canada would like to thank the African Group for its submission related to agricultural 
production and trade in NFIDCs  and LDCs and its submission related to SP S Measures (covered in 
the next agenda item). This intervention applies to  both items 13 and 14 . 
13.46.   We note that there has been significant discussion on these topics in the SPS Committee, 
the Committee on Agriculture, the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session and in dedicated 
work programmes operating under the auspices of those committees.  
13.47.   These proposed Ministerial Decisions have not been discussed in those forums and we do 
not believe that the broader discussions in those forums have shown convergen ce on key issues 
such that these proposed Ministerial decisions are ready for discussion at the General Council.  
13.48.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
13.49.   Like my previous speakers, we are also still reviewing this proposal at the capi tal. So, I 
would like to make some preliminary comments today.  
13.50.   This draft decision contains issues that should be first discussed at CoA SS , such as special 
treatment for LDCs and NFIDCs in domestic support (special treatment of AMS that exceeds de 
minimis  limits for basic foodstuffs that are highly dependent on imports) and export subsidies 
(extension of S&DT).  
13.51.   In addition, there are issues such as export restrictions, finance and export credits in the 
draft decision on which we had a series of discussions  until the end of last month within the 
framework of the COA work programme on the emergency response to food insecurity, and yet to 
arrive at a consensus.  
13.52.   Therefore, we are not quite confident at this stage whether it would be appropriate to bring 
up the contents of this draft decision at the General Council without having first gone through the 
appropriate and sufficient work at respective dedicated subsidiary bodies.  
13.53.   The representative of Ukraine  delivered the following statement:  
13.54.   Ukraine welcomes the ef forts by the African Group to address a set of pressing issues 
regarding the food security of LDCs and NFIDCs. We are fully aware of the challenges these countries 
are facing. 400 million people still rely on the export of food stuffs from Ukraine while th e world 
continues witnessing the growing threats to global food security since the beginning of Russia's 
invasion of Ukraine. We consider that the document presented by the African Group to be worthy of 
our further detailed examination . However , it should be noted that some elements, particularly the 
requested flexibilities are already part of the documents presented at CoA SS . We see enough space 
for convergence and look forward to engaging in productive discussions with a view to finding a 
mutually agreea ble solution.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 95 - 
 
  13.55.   The representative of Costa Rica  delivered the following statement:  
13.56.   Costa Rica thanks the African Group for submitting this document. Costa Rica notes that the 
proposal addresses elements that have been discussed under the Committee on Agricu lture's work 
programme on food insecurity. In this connection, a substantial draft set of regulations has been 
developed in recent months, on which consensus came close to being reached, with the exception 
of an objection raised by one Member. We encourage  the African Group to step up its consultations 
with that Member, with a view to securing the adoption of the report.  
13.57.   We also note that there are elements concerning the modification of domestic support 
commitments. We consider that the African Group shoul d continue the discussions on these domestic 
support -related elements in the appropriate setting, which is the Special Session of the Committee 
on Agriculture.  
13.58.   Furthermore, Costa Rica wishes to highlight that the requests made in this area in the African 
Group's document are already clearly and effectively addressed in the proposal on domestic support 
submitted by Costa Rica and the Cairns Group in JOB/AG/243/Rev.1 . We therefore invite the African 
Group and other delegations to examine this proposal and to continue working alongside us to build 
bridges and find comprehensive and holistic solutions that are mutually beneficial and in keeping 
with the mandate of Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture, which should form the basis of 
Minister s' mandate at MC13 with regard to agricultural negotiations.  
13.59.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
13.60.   Thank you to the Africa n Group for their submission and presentation. Given it was only 
circulated two days ago London is still reviewing it. At this stage we wanted to reiterate the point 
we made under Agenda item 11; the negotiations are going on in CoA  SS, and they are live. We 
encourage Members with Agricultural issues to bring them there. As others have said, we agree  on 
the approach that we need to enhance productivity, sustainability and productive capacity.  
13.61.   Time is short ahead of MC13. This proposal is jam -packed. It asks Members and other 
international organizations  to make serious commitments, including expanding limits on trade 
distorting support, establishing a new international compensatory financing mechanism.  
13.62.   We also have concerns as others have said around some of the new suggestions on 
flexibilities.  
13.63.   As others have said, negotiations are live in the CoA  SS. 
13.64.   We should all know the difficulties that we are facing there. We need a holistic approach in 
the interests of all Members, we need proposals like these to be part of that conversation.  
13.65.   We also have a food security work programme under CoA  SS as agreed at MC12. As a first 
step, Members should agree to conclude the food security work programme and its report as 
currently complied. Particularly as one Member is blocking this.  
13.66.   The representative of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
13.67.   Australia reco gnizes the dire impact that global food insecurity is having on developing 
countries, LDCs and NFIDCs, in particular. Action is needed, hence Australia's and the C airns Group 
emphasis on the necessity of fundamental reform in agriculture to reduce distorti ons and to help 
Members diversify their food supply. The C airns Group has presented our vision on how to achieve 
this, a holistic and comprehensive approach to agricultural trade reform in line with Article 20 and 
hence our submission as others have referr ed to in JOB/AG/243/Rev.1 . The C airns Group is 
committed to working with the African Group and other interested WTO Members towards this type 
of reform. It remains our view that we simply will not reach global food security, development 
livelihoods and environmental challenges without it. We would take this opportunity to reiterate our 
view that proposals on agricultural trade reform should go through the relevant Committee for 
discussions, that being the CoA SS.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 96 - 
 
  13.68.   The represent ative of Kazakhstan  delivered the following statement:  
13.69.   We would like to thank the African Group for presenting this proposal . Our capital is still 
reviewing  it because we  only received i t yesterday. We understand the reasons behind this 
submission and stan d ready for further engagement with the African Group.  
13.70.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
13.71.   I would like to sincerely thank the delegations that have expressed their interest in this 
important i ssue. We have taken note of their comments. Promoting and bolstering agriculture in 
LDCs and NFIDCs is a priority concern and was even part of the package at the Mini-Ministerial  
meeting on agriculture on 28 November.  
13.72.   We will continue to work constructive ly with all the delegations, and we remain open to 
discussions. As highlighted by my colleague from Egypt, this is an issue that requires universal moral 
solidarity.  
13.73.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
14  DRAFT MINISTERIAL DECISION ON SPS MEASUR ES - REQUEST FROM THE AFRICAN 
GROUP   
14.1.   The Chairperson  invited Cameroon, on behalf of the African Group, to introduce the item  
"Draft Ministerial Decision on SPS Measures".  
14.2.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the followi ng 
statement:  
14.3.   Thank you, Chair, for giving me the opportunity to present, on behalf of the African Group, 
the draft Decision on Sanitary and Phytosanitary (SPS) Measures, which has been submitted for 
consideration by the General Council with a view to a de cision by ministers at MC13.  
14.4.   This draft decision, contained in document WT/GC/W/914  - G/SPS/W/347 , is part of a parallel 
approach and is complementary to the SPS Declaration adopted on 17 June 2022 at MC12, under 
which an SPS Committee programme was established. The purpose of this draft text is to propose 
specific measures to e ffectively and diligently address the challenges constantly faced by developing 
countries, particularly LDCs, regarding compliance with the SPS standards imposed by importing 
Members.  
14.5.   While the African Group recognizes Members' right to take measures to pr otect human, animal 
and plant health, it remains concerned about the rise in SPS measures that are arbitrary and not 
based on science, as well as the specific challenges faced by developing countries and LDCs in 
meeting the sanitary and phytosanitary requi rements of many of their trading partners, with 
consequences that continue to affect their market access and export competitiveness.  
14.6.   Thus, while reaffirming the rules and principles guiding the adoption and application of 
measures, as set out in the Agreem ent on the Application of SPS Measures, the draft decision focuses 
on steps that could be taken to minimize the impact of SPS measures on the exporting capacities of 
the countries concerned. In this connection, the WT/GC/ W/914  draft contains provisions that  would 
require all importing countries to enter into consultations, within a reasonable time period, with any 
exporting developing country or LDC that identifies specific problems in complying with a sanitary 
or phytosanitary measure that the importing Mem ber has taken or plans to  introduce, with a view 
to finding a mutually satisfactory solution.  
14.7.   The decision would also require developed country Members and developing country Members 
in a position to do so, to take account of the special needs of developi ng country Members and, in 
particular, least developed country Members, when introducing and applying SPS measures, in 
particular by granting longer time frames for compliance, upon request from any developing country, 
for products of interest to it.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 97 - 
 
  14.8.   The draft text also provides that all importing developed country Members shall assist 
exporting developing country Members that identify specific problems of capacity in fulfilling the 
sanitary or phytosanitary requirements of a developed country, to acquire the required capacity on 
preferential and non -commercial terms, preferably free of cost, keeping in view the development, 
financial and trade needs of the exporting developing country. In addition, it is proposed that the 
Codex Alimentarius Commission, the  World Organization for Animal Health (WOAH) and the 
International Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) assist the SPS  Committee with interpretation of the 
SPS standards that are the subject of specific trade concerns.  
14.9.   Lastly, the draft text calls on Member s and the Secretariat of the SPS Committee to strengthen 
efforts to provide technical assistance to developing country Members to adjust to and comply with 
sanitary and phytosanitary measures in order to achieve the appropriate level of sanitary and 
phytos anitary protection.  The African Group remains open to consultations with interested 
delegations and intends to engage constructively with Members in discussions on the draft text, with 
a view to a Ministerial Decision on SPS measures at MC13.  
14.10.   The represent ative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
14.11.   My delegation thanks the African Group for submitting this document, which we broadly 
support.  The proliferation of tariff barriers that create unjustified restrictions to trade, primarily in 
agricultura l products, is evident from the huge number of trade concerns being raised in the WTO 
subsidiary bodies. In the SPS Committee, some measures clearly fail to meet the requirement of 
being based on scientific principles and risk assessments. This is especial ly true of measures adopted 
by certain developed Members or groups of Members, which have strayed from the science to the 
point of ignoring their own regulators and taking decisions based purely on political considerations.  
14.12.   My delegation, as part of the gr oup of Latin American countries that have been working 
together on SPS matters, takes a keen interest in this issue, in the strengthening of the SPS 
Agreement, and in the question of how to give effect to the special and differential treatment for 
developi ng countries under the SPS Agreement. We invite the African Group to reach out to the Latin 
American delegations with a view to moving forward on a revised draft together.  
14.13.   Before I conclude, I wish to recall that the SPS Declaration at MC12 has resulted in  important 
work and a report on findings and recommendations, which is still under consideration by the capitals 
of two delegations, one of which is an African Group member. We call for Members to engage with 
that delegation so that it can join the consens us, given the African Group's clear and stated interest 
in these issues, and the report of the working groups of the MC12 Declaration can be presented to 
ministers in Abu Dhabi.  
14.14.   The representative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
14.15.   We tha nk the African Group for its proposal of WT/GC/W/914 . We understand the 
background of this submission. However, we would still like to make a couple of observations on this 
item: First, several elements suggested in this proposal seem to have exceeded or added to the 
rights or obligations of Members provided in the SPS Agreement. This might not be strictly in line 
with Members' understanding during the SPS Committee meetings in this regard.  
14.16.   Second, the SPS Committee has intensively discussed a possible SPS Declaration , a report 
of which is scheduled to be submitted to MC13. This intended report is supposed to expect the SPS 
Committee to continue its targeted discussions and reflections on the implementation of the SPS 
Agreement. In o ther words, mechanisms and procedures are already in place within the SPS 
Committee to improve the implementation of the SPS Agreement. We therefore urge the relevant 
discussion to be taken place within the SPS Committee, before the issue being submitted t o the 
General Council.  
14.17.   The representative of Côte d'Ivoire  delivered the following statement:  
14.18.   Côte d'Ivoire wishes to associate itself with the statement made by Cameroon on behalf of 
the African Group. We have ongoing concerns regarding the application of  SPS measures. We 
continue to draw Members' attention to the proliferation of SPS measures , which are restrictive or 
without scientific basis that limit our export opportunities and are major challenges and constraints WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 98 - 
 
  raised regularly by our export compan ies, especially micro -, small - and medium -sized enterprises 
(MSMEs).  
14.19.   The draft decision submitted by the African Group includes specific measures to tackle these 
issues without undermining the right of Members to implement measures to protect human, animal , 
and plant life or health. We therefore urge delegations to welcome this draft decision. For our part, 
we remain ready to engage in consultations with the other delegations with a view to arriving at a 
decision.  
14.20.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
14.21.   China thanks the African Group for submitting the proposal on SPS Measures and sees many 
valuable views and suggestions in it. Though our experts in the capital are still reviewing it, we 
support it in general. China is ready to have f urther discussions with the proponents and is interested 
in seeking further elaborations on some issues. For this purpose, we would suggest having  it 
discussed in the SPS Committee for better understanding.  
14.22.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
14.23.   The Russian Federation would like to thank the African Group for its draft of Ministerial 
decision on SPS measures intended to strengthen  special and differential treatment provisions and 
making them more precise, effective a nd operational.  
14.24.   We note that this proposal largely resembles G -90 initiative on modifying SDT in the SPS 
and TBT Agreements. Acknowledging difficulties of developing countries in meeting the SPS 
requirements of many of their trading partners and a consist ent trend towards a significant increase 
of SPS measures in the last few years we still believe that such proposals should be duly examined 
and discussed in the WTO bodies such as the SPS Committee and the Committee on Trade and 
Development. The Russian Fe deration expresses its readiness to work constructively on this issue.  
14.25.   The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
14.26.   In advocating for the adoption of this decision at MC13, Egypt underscores the critical need 
to address challenges faced b y developing countries, especially LDCs, in adhering to Sanitary and 
Phytosanitary (SPS) standards imposed by importing members. The proposed decision, outlined in 
WT/GC/W/914  and G/SPS/W/347 , aligns with the parallel approach initiated following the SPS 
declaration in June 2022. Egypt emphasizes the rising concerns about arbitrary SPS measures 
lacking scientific basis, disproportionately affecting Developing and Least Developed Countries, 
impacting their market access and export competitiveness negatively.  We support the statement 
made by Cameroon on behalf of the African Group.  
14.27.   This decision calls for a collaborative effort, urging importing countries to engage in timely 
consultations with developing or LDC exporting countries to find mutually satisfactory  solutions for 
specific SPS compliance challenges. It also encourages developed members to consider the special 
needs of developing and least developed countries, offering extended timelines upon request, 
particularly for products of interest. Furthermore,  the decision proposes that developed importing 
members provide non -commercial, preferably free assistance to developing exporting members 
facing capacity challenges in complying with SPS requirements. Egypt highlights the support from 
the Codex Alimentari us Commission, World Organization for Animal Health (OIE), and International 
Plant Protection Convention (IPPC) to interpret SPS standards of specific commercial concern.  
14.28.   In conclusion, Egypt asserts that adopting this decision is crucial for promoting fai r and 
effective trade practices, addressing the technical and capacity challenges faced by developing 
members, and ensuring the appropriate level of sanitary and phytosanitary protection. Egypt 
remains open to consultations and commits to constructive enga gement with fellow members to 
facilitate a ministerial decision on SPS measures at MC13.  
14.29.   The representative of Costa Rica  delivered the following statement:  
14.30.   Costa Rica wishes to thank the African Group for presenting this document. We share the 
concerns of  the African Group regarding the increase in non -tariff barriers through sanitary and WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 99 - 
 
  phytosanitary measures. We welcome the valuable elements of this proposal, which cover many of 
the points discussed in the MC12 SPS Declaration working groups. We also no te that the text was 
not referred to the SPS Committee, which would have been very useful in drawing up the draft 
report. We would therefore like to invite the African Group to refer these issues to the SPS 
Committee, which will begin the Sixth Review of i ts operation in 2024.  
14.31.   The representative of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
14.32.   The SPS Agreement remains highly relevant in supporting safe global trade in food, animal 
and plant products. Australia continues to support efforts to facilitate the implementation of this 
Agreement, including through the standards and trade development facility. We have welcomed 
extensive discussions in the SPS Committee under the MC12 Declaration Work Programme and we 
are looking forward to the draft report being finalized, noting that there are only two WTO Members 
currently not able to join consensus.   
14.33.   As many others , we look forward and ask the African Group to submit their proposal for 
discussion in the SPS Committee. Australia and other Cairns Group members share a number of 
concerns raised on the restricted impact of certain trade measure s and will expand on this during 
the next agenda's item.  
14.34.   The represent ative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
14.35.   The European Union is very surprised to see the request of the African Group at this stage 
and would like to share its concerns both on process and content.  We understand that there might 
be legitimate concerns with SPS measures by different Members. But the text of the SPS Declaration 
work programme and the draft report to MC13 are the result of a long discussion between the 
Members. And we regret that the African Group has decided to remain si lent during the process and 
to address comments only at this final stage.  
14.36.   While we in the European Union have been welcoming different contributions, we would call 
upon all Members to cooperate with the chair and facilitator to streamline the process.  Given the 
difficult negotiations, the delicate balance, and the time and procedural constraints, the European 
Union is not in favor of re-opening the current version of the factual summary of the SPS Declaration 
work programme and the draft report for MC13.  
14.37.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
14.38.   India would like to thank the African Group for submitting this proposal , which is being 
examined in capital and w e will get back on this proposal.  
14.39.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of th e African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
14.40.   I would like to sincerely thank the delegations that have participated in this discussion and 
expressed their interest. Their comments on the matter have been noted. This is an important issue 
for us. We remain open, not only on this matter, but in all upcoming negotiations across all 
committees, and we will continue to work constructively with all delegations.  
14.41.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
15  TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER AND ECONOMIC RESILIENCE – REQUEST FROM THE AFRICAN 
GROUP  
15.1.   The Chairperson  invited Cameroon, to introduce on behalf of the African G roup, the item 
"Technology Transfer and Economic Resilience" that has been included in the agenda . 
15.2.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
15.3.   I deliver this statement on behalf of the African Group, representing the collective voice of 44 
member s, particularly focusing on the critical issue of technology transfer and diffusion within the WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 100 - 
 
  framewor k of the WTO.  Recognizing the paramount importance of technology transfer and diffusion 
in the context of building economic resilience in developing and least developed countries, we 
acknowledge the transformative power of technology in establishing a mode rn and technologically 
advanced industrial base. Technology serves as a catalyst for progress, playing a pivotal role in 
addressing multifaceted challenges such as food insecurity, pandemics, climate change, and 
fostering innovation, all of which are funda mental to sustainable development.  
15.4.   The declaration proposed builds upon the foundation laid by the Fourth WTO Ministerial 
Conference Declaration in Doha in November 2001, establishing the Working Group on Trade and 
Transfer of Technology (WGTTT). It is inc umbent upon us to further advance this work to ensure 
that the barriers hindering the facilitation, access, and transfer of technologies to developing and 
least developed countries are effectively addressed.  Considering this, the African Group, proposes 
that our ministers approve this Declaration/Decision in mC13, the main elements of which are as 
follows:  
15.5.   First: The establishment of a dedicated agenda item in all relevant WTO bodies to examine 
the specific relationship between trade and transfer of technol ogy. This includes an assessment of 
measures adopted by members constraining technology transfer and the identification of agreement -
specific flexibilities needed to promote transfer and diffusion to developing and least developed 
countries.  
15.6.   Second: initia ting a Comprehensive Examination Process that should encompass a thorough 
assessment of issues such as constraints hampering technology transfer, the needs of developing 
and least developed countries for enhanced assistance, and an evaluation of the role o f technical 
assistance and capacity -building programs. Particularly, focus on environmentally sound technology 
(EST) and financial commitments should be emphasized.  
15.7.   Third: conducting "periodic reviews" by the Working Group on Trade and Transfer of 
Technolo gy based on reports submitted by relevant WTO bodies, members shall be encouraged to 
continue sharing experiences on initiatives and programs aimed at facilitating and promoting 
technology transfer. These reviews shall contribute to developing recommendati ons, by MC14, for 
increasing technology flow to developing and least developed countries.  
15.8.   Fourth: the decision urges Members to conduct a review of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS 
Agreement to ensure an effective transfer of technology to least developed countri es, including 
through the Technology Bank for LDCs.  
15.9.   Fifth: the decision initiates "Enhanced Data Collection Process" by the Secretariat, which 
should play a proactive role in collecting information on the cost of technology transfer, including 
royalties an d other payments to developing and least developed countries. Additionally, the decision 
advocates for an improvement in the collection of public statistics, including intellectual property 
rights statistics in WTO stats, with the production of annual publ ications on technology transfer flows 
in all sectors.  
15.10.   The African Group has invested substantial effort and time to engage with the membership 
on that matter in almost all subsidiary bodies since the beginning of the year. We submitted several 
documents, a nd we presented our ideas and thoughts in that regard. Now it is time that this 
organization considers reinvigorating the work on such an important issue.  This decision should align 
with our vision for a future where technology serves as an inclusive force , driving economic growth, 
fostering resilience, and contributing to the sustainable development of our nations. We call upon all 
members to join hands in supporting these proposals for the betterment of our shared future.  
15.11.   The representative of Chile delivered the following statement:  
15.12.   Chile recognizes the growing importance of discussions around technology transfer and the 
role of the multilateral trading system therein, within the different forums of the WTO. In our opinion, 
Members have a clear inte rest in the matter, which will likely grow – rather than diminish – in the 
future, owing to the urgent and unprecedented challenges we are facing in areas such as food 
security, health, the environment and the digital divide. We see a growing belief among Members 
that technology transfer could help to mitigate these challenges.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 101 - 
 
  15.13.   With this in mind, we welcome the initiative of the African Group, which we regard as an 
invitation to hold more substantive discussions on technology transfer and the role of the mu ltilateral 
trading system therein. Accordingly, we wish to express our interest in exploring the relationship 
that exists between technology transfer and economic development, particularly the role of 
technology transfer in increasing productivity; technol ogy transfer as a tool for enhancing industrial 
development and economic diversification; the role of technical assistance and capacity building 
programmes for developing and least developed countries; and how to enable small and medium 
sized enterprises i n developing and least developed countries to benefit from the various technology 
transfer tools, instruments and platforms.  We are likewise in favour of sharing experiences of 
technology transfer and trade, and of supplementing and strengthening our work with that of other 
international organizations, industry and academia.  
15.14.   The representative of Tanzania  delivered the following statement:  
15.15.   We would like to briefly register our strong support to the submission of the African group 
as presented by the coordin ator of the group, Cameroon.  It is factual that climate change related 
disasters have increased,  and we are likely to witness more and more in the new future. Most of 
climate adaptation and mitigation measures are in a form of technological solution.  Devel oping 
countries should be facilitated to produce of certain type environmentally friendly or cleaner 
products, as a shared responsibility for a common course.  
15.16.   Extending some flexibilities to developing countries in the context of the for environmentally 
sound technologies and in particular for clean energy technologies would help make the multilateral 
trade regime more consistent with international climate change agreements. This would offer 
manufacturers in developing countries quicker access to key green  technologies, with a view to 
combat climate change, that will benefit all of us looking at it from a holistic view.  
15.17.   Therefore, having extensive examination of the relationship between trade and transfer of 
technology and allowing discussion to take place in WTO relevant bodies, is something to be 
encouraged. From such discussion, we will identify some specific flexibilities and technologies to be 
diffused in developing and LDC. It will lead to a meaningful implementation of TRIPS Article 66.2, 
as well as i nvigorate the work of the Working Group of Transfer of Technology in the WTO. In closing, 
our delegation would like to commend the chair of the Working Group on Transfer of Technology for 
encouraging members to submit their ideas to revamp the work.  
15.18.   The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
15.19.   Egypt emphatically supports the endorsement of the elements of a draft decision on 
Technology Transfer and Economic Resilience (as presented in the statement made by the 
Ambassador of Cameroon on be half of the AG group) for a myriad of compelling reasons that 
resonate with our commitment to inclusivity, sustainable development, and addressing the unique 
challenges faced by developing and least developed countries.  
15.20.   We firmly align ourselves with the p roposed elements for a Declaration (as presented by 
Cameroon on behalf of the AG), recognizing the indispensable role of technology in fostering 
economic resilience. The WTO should adopt a decision that underscores the urgency of addressing 
the distinctive  development needs, particularly in developing and least developed country members.  
15.21.   We see merits in the African call for a dedicated agenda item in relevant WTO bodies, 
emphasizing our commitment to transparency and inclusivity. The WTO should affirm its dedication 
to creating a more inclusive platform that evaluates measures constraining technology transfer as it 
relates to trade and more to current challenges.  
15.22.   The potential decision should acknowledge the significance of the Comprehensive 
Examination Pro cess, focusing on environmentally sound technology and financial commitments. 
The WTO would actively contribute to the global agenda of sustainable development, aligning our 
efforts with the broader objectives of the WTO and the international community.  
15.23.   The proposed elements of the decision include a mandate to Enhancing Information -Sharing 
through the proposed periodic reviews by the Working Group on Trade and Transfer of Technology. 
The potential decision should recognize the power of collaborative inform ation-sharing among WTO WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 102 - 
 
  members, facilitate a more informed decision -making process, allowing countries to benefit from 
shared experiences and best practices in technology transfer.  
15.24.   Egypt urges all WTO members to consider a ministerial decision on ToT in M C13. This pivotal 
step reflects our collective commitment to addressing the developmental needs of member 
countries, promoting inclusivity, advancing sustainable development goals, enhancing information -
sharing, addressing challenges in the TRIPS Agreement , and facilitating evidence -based decision -
making.  
15.25.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
15.26.   The United States recognizes the important role of science, research and innovation as a 
means to sustainably increase production to feed a growing world population, while securing the 
livelihood of farmers and addressing emerging challenges for the international trade of agricultural 
products. We are interested to know how the African Group intends to drive the work they propose 
forward.  
15.27.   A process point that we want to raise, is that there is no document attached to this item in 
the agenda. I recognize that earlier this year there were six papers that were presented by the 
African Group on technology transfer in relation to various aspects of the WTO Agreements. We do 
not clearly understand if this item in the agenda is related to those documents as there is no 
document number related; we have also just heard a reference to a draft decision that we do not 
know about. We need to make these long meetings more useful. More clarity of what we are 
discussing will help all of us.   
15.28.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
15.29.   All that needs to be said on the proposal has been said by our coordinator Cameroon. So, 
we want  to align ourselves with that statement and to call on Members to support the proposal.  
15.30.   The representative of Brazil delivered the following statement : 
15.31.   We thank the African Group for presenting this topic of utmost importance. We would like to 
highlight that some international commitments made by developing countries in different 
agreements and organizations may not by fulfilled without the help of specific technologies. It is also 
important to bear in mind that without transfer of technology ce rtain developing countries may 
remain at the margin of the international trade system for longer than necessary.  
15.32.   Brazil is a supporter of the discussions of trade and transfer of technology in the Working 
Group. We also welcome Chile's interest as Chair of  the Working Group to see it strengthened, 
including by encouraging Members to submit more proposals – to have more in -depth discussions 
on this relevant issue. We welcome proposals that will strengthen the Working Group and will make 
it more relevant with in the WTO structure. The idea of perhaps having a discussion that is horizontal 
and that addresses the different aspects of the bodies makes sense. We have not seen the draft 
decision yet, so we will wait for a document, so we can express positions that a re more in detail. 
The overall trust of this initiative seems to go in a positive direction.  
15.33.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
15.34.   We understand this agenda item to deal with the African Group's communications, six in 
total,  on trade and technology transfers. We thank the Ambassador of Cameroun for the introduction.  
There is still a lot to be learnt on how effective technology transfer can take place. In this regard, 
additional evidence -based analysis, as well as exchanging v iews and sharing experience may be 
useful in order to gather and discuss evidence and  get a better understanding on the relationship 
between trade and technology transfer. It also seems essential to take into account efforts that are 
made in other international fora in order to build on existing work rather than duplicate it.  
15.35.   Many factors are needed to create real incentives for technology transfer to happen – 
including the right infrastructure, a conducive business environment, sufficient absorption capacity, 
and last but not least, a well -functioning, reliable, safe and enforceable regula tory framework, 
including the protection of intellectual property rights.  Ultimately, it is regularly the private sector WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 103 - 
 
  which is the holder of technology and it will decide on the basis of these and other factors whether 
and with whom to share its technol ogy. It is therefore paramount that the private sector be involved 
in subsequent deliberations and experience -sharing activities on the matter.  
15.36.   The representative of India delivered the following statement15: 
15.37.   This agenda item is very important. I think the re is some confusion  on this because this 
agenda is on the transfer of technology. It emanates from the February retreat on development; 
after the February retreat on development the Africa n Group came up with a broad proposal in 
March, which was circulate d to various Committees and then in the month of July, they had 
Committee -specific proposals for technology transfer, there were six proposals, and I hope 
Cameroon will bear me out, that we are discussing under this agenda those six items, plus the 
mother proposal of March. Since no links or papers were given, there is confusion, I would request 
that you take it afresh tomorrow with those six papers, circulated to the Members, so that we can 
engage in these discussions more effectively. However, if it is no t agreeable, then I will just read a 
one-minute statement, which is the reinvigoration of discussion on technology transfer.  
15.38.   We welcome the submissions made by the Africa Group and support it. We hope that a 
concrete mandate will be delivered in MC13 on t hese issues. Technology transfer is a priority for us. 
The WTO recognizes the close relationship between trade and the transfer of technology, as 
evidenced in the establishment of the Working Group on Trade and Technology Transfer (WGTTT) 
in 2002. The role  of the WGTTT was to discuss ways to increase technology flows from developed to 
developing countries. The issue of technology transfer is now perhaps more important than ever 
before, given the central role of development and transfer of environmentally so und technology to 
address climate change. India's paper JOB/WGTTT/2 , also submitted to the Committee on Trade and 
Environment and Council for TRIPS makes a case for advancing these discussions in the WTO.  
15.39.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the fo llowing statement:  
15.40.   My delegation would like to associate itself with the African Group statement. Trade and 
technology transfer is an area that requires serious attention in the WTO , and it has indeed been 
looked at in the Working Group and there is much c ross-sharing of experience that we believe needs 
to happen more in this area.  
15.41.   Opportunities are opening up, especially with a growing commercial activity to develop parts 
of green technologies in developing countries for technology transfer. As several sp eakers have 
highlighted, technology transfer plays and important role in promoting economic development and 
building resilience. This will be extremely important in the context of decarbonization as well as in 
various other discussions that we have been ha ving on instruments that are appropriate to promote 
industrial policy. This can be a powerful tool to breach the developmental gap between countries , as 
well as to promote sustainable development.  
15.42.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the fol lowing statement:  
15.43.   The U nited Kingdom  thanks the African Group for its papers. We have found the various 
discussions in the committees helpful. We do want to just pause, and like the US, we are a little 
unclear about the process. We agree with the point tha t they made. It is always helpful to see 
something in writing to guide our discussions.  We are presuming this is on the 6 African Group 
papers that have previously been submitted. As a Member that also has a paper on Technology 
Transfer, we have been activ e in the discussions across the WTO.  
15.44.   Hearing about the experiences of Members and their stakeholders has been informative and 
has been a good basis for constructive discussions.  We think that the input is critical to the discussion 
on how to promote volunt ary technology transfer further, and we welcome further discussions with 
Members . We recognize that technology transfer might not be a silver bullet, but we see it has an 
important role to play and very much has delivered results.  
 
15 Following the meeting, the delegation of India submitted subsequently their oral and written statements 
to the Sec retariat for inclusion in the record. India's written statements have been included in the Annex, as 
requested.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 104 - 
 
  15.45.   The U nited Kingdom  believes that establishing a shared understanding of what constitutes 
voluntary technology transfer is important in continuing this discussion.  There are several factors 
that might help facilitate voluntary technology transfer. It is important to consider all o f these factors 
and find practical responses. We also believe that the Working Group on Trade and Technology 
Transfer is best placed to coordinate these discussions. It brings together what we have heard across 
the various committees, and can identify cros s cutting elements and themes so we can continue to 
discuss this in a constructive spirit. And we all know we are in the safe hands of the Chilean 
Ambassador.  
15.46.   Members will also be aware that the U nited Kingdom  has a paper on IP that touches on 
technology transfer in relation to voluntary licensing. The U nited Kingdom  is keen to continue to 
discuss this to understand Members' perspectives better, and to consider the evidence base, to try 
to find a constructive w ay forward. We would welcome engagement with our proposal, particularly 
by sharing national experiences so that we can continue to develop our understanding and deepen 
this conversation and dialogue to work out what best practice looks like and how we can deliver it 
in the future.  
15.47.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
15.48.   We thank the African Group for including this item on the agenda, and we hope to have the 
concrete proposal very soon. Technology transfer is undoubtedly of great i mportance for developing 
countries like Paraguay.  
15.49.   We would like to draw particular attention to the importance of technology transfer for 
climate change adaptation and mitigation, as was set out very well by the African Group in document 
WT/GC/W/886 , and w e state our openness to and interest in continuing to work on this issue with 
the African Group and all interested parties in the run -up to MC13.  
15.50.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
15.51.   Japan shares  the high interest in technology tr ansfer and we appreciate all explanation 
provided today by African group on this agenda. And we will certainly continue to engage 
constructively in the works at the working group or respective subsidiary bodies which are discussing 
specific proposal relate d to this issue.  Beyond that, due to original lack on our side of the 
understanding of the specificities of agenda, I am with very general line with regard to technology 
transfer or technology dissemination.  
15.52.   We believe that the main channel of actual tech nology transfer, should be dissemination of 
technology information through trade, investment, joint projects, and sound functioning of IP 
systems. From this perspective, we think WTO's core competence points to a promotion and 
encouraging those activities through its rule set. From the viewpoint of market -mechanism and 
innovative potential in the private sector, we have a strong reservation on discussions that would 
lead to any form of forced technology transfer.  
15.53.   The representative of Canada  delivered the f ollowing statement:  
15.54.   I have a reform -by-doing proposal to make. We struggled and we really do not know what 
is going on with this agenda item. First of all, just to stress that we do very much welcome the 
contributions by the African Group and we agree that  this issue of technology transfer is a very 
important issue, but it was not clear to us whether we are talking about existing papers, which 
maybe and in which case that is legitimate, or a proposal in which case it would be legitimate if we 
have seen it w ith enough time to review it, or whether this is a topic for discussion in which in any 
case we should be clear and also be able to prepare. So, in that light, my proposal will be that when 
we have an agenda item, we just have a bit more clarity either fro m the requester or from 
somewhere as to what to do because we would like to contribute to this discussion.  
15.55.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group, delivered the following 
statement:  
15.56.   I would like to begin by sincerely thanking all th e delegations for their interest in this 
important issue. Technology transfer is crucial. We take on board some of comments that have been WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 105 - 
 
  made concerning the submission of documents, which we will make available to the Secretariat 
tomorrow for further inf ormation. We will also approach other delegations that have expressed 
reservations to this delegation. We remain very open and constructive because, as many delegates 
have said, this is a key issue. The transfer of technology is becoming increasingly impor tant in 
today's world.  
15.57.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
16  THE CONTRIBUTION OF THE MULTILATERAL TRADING SYSTEM TO SUSTAINABLE AND 
RESILIENT AGRICULTURE AND FOOD SYSTEMS – STATEMENT BY THE CAIRNS GROUP 
(WT/GC/261 ) 
16.1.   The Chairperson  invited Australia, on behalf of the Cairns Group , to introduce the item  "The 
Contribution of the Multilateral Trading System to Sustainable and Resilient Agriculture and Food 
System ".  
16.2.   The representative of Australia , on behalf of the C airns Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
16.3.   The reason we introduced this in the July General Council , the reason that the Cairns Group 
has in mind this statement is because resilient and sustainable agriculture and food systems are 
essential to m eeting the goals of global food security and economic development, as well as 
environmental sustainability. This relationship between trade and sustainability is something we 
have got to keep working on together. We said at the last GC meeting that we woul d be pleased to 
present this statement on the contribution of the multilateral trading system to sustainable and 
resilient agriculture and food systems in document WT/GC/261 . We originally submitted this 
statement at the Committee on Agriculture in September.  
16.4.   There is no one -size-fits-all approach to sustainable agriculture. What works in one part of 
the world does not necessarily work in others. This is an important recognition. Second, we would 
make the point that measures in the name of environmental sustai nability should not be 
unnecessarily trade restrictive. That is a big fundamental thought behind this piece of paper. Third, 
unilateral approaches do risk undermining  multilateral approach to trade and sustainability. So , this 
statement underlines that mea sures need to be based on science, evidence and need to be consistent 
with WTO Members' obligations as we focus on environmental outcomes. We have been pretty active 
right across the membership on looking at ways to reconcile trade and environment measures  and 
to avoid unnecessarily trade restrictive import measures . We look forward to further discussions 
with Members on this issue in the months ahead.  
16.5.   The representative of Cameroon , on behalf of the African Group , delivered the following 
statement:  
16.6.   The Afr ican Group thanks the Cairns Group for their paper.  This paper is yet another attempt 
to reset the agriculture negotiating agenda by pitching a narrative of food security that harps 
completely on trade liberalization while ignoring Ministerial mandates on critical food security 
instruments such as PSH and SSM. This would have detrimental effects on developing economies 
that are disproportionately affected by global food insecurity.  
16.7.   We believe Developing countries, which face a greater burden of food insecu rity, must 
themselves decide on the solutions and not have solutions superimposed on them from outside, 
especially by countries which have commercial/export interest in agriculture rather than a food 
security perspective. The African Group is of the view t hat a medium and long -term solution to food 
security challenges can only be delivered through a MC13 outcome that include substantive food 
security and livelihoods package with decisions on issues under negotiations in the C oA SS such as 
PSH, and SSM, as w ell as outcome on domestic support that addresses the inequitable elements of 
Domestic Support, trade distorting forms of Green Box and Blue Box. This would foster fair 
agriculture trading system and allow greater policy space for Developing Countries to s upport 
production and livelihoods. These are the outcomes that are necessary for ensuring food security in 
developing countries and LDCs.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 106 - 
 
  16.8.   We know that reforming the agricultural trade support architecture from the imbalances in 
the AoA that benefit large a gricultural subsidizers , in particularly developed economies, and the 
substantial reduction in agricultural trade support is central to the reform envisaged under Article  20. 
However, we believe that it is premature for any Member to call for further marke t liberalization 
when our agriculture sector is itself constrained from using necessary tools which are limited by the 
AoA rules, and also because of the continuation of massive subsidies especially in Developed 
Countries.  The African Group would continue to engage constructively with the Cairns Group and 
other Members so we can deliver effective WTO solution to Global Food insecurity.  
16.9.   The representative of Ecuador  delivered the following statement:  
16.10.    I thank the Cairns Group for including this item on the a genda.  We concur with the Cairns 
Group that the long -awaited multilateral agricultural trade reform must be progressed as a matter 
of urgency in a comprehensive manner, consistent with Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture.  
To promote fair and transpa rent international agricultural trade, compliance with the relevant 
WTO Agreements is essential, while recognizing that Members have different and unique agricultural 
production conditions and practices.  Sustainable agriculture is vital for improving food security.   
16.11.   It is a fundamental pillar of the future we aspire to, in which the deterioration in human 
health caused by malnutrition and poverty, invariably linked to hunger, are things of the past.  
However, we must also reiterate that imposi ng trade policy measures for environmental purposes 
may constitute a form of arbitrary discrimination. It may adversely affect agricultural production and 
trade, especially in developing countries, when such measures are applied unilaterally, without 
taking into account the fact that multilateral standards, such as the Codex Alimentarius, are in force , 
and without recognizing other Members'  points of view s or environmental policies.  
16.12.   Ecuador shares the approaches set out in the proposal and we stand ready to  work with 
other Members to promote agricultural trade without arbitrary barriers, that finds the balance 
between trade and environmental protection, and that safeguards developing countries' sustainable 
development and needs.  
16.13.   The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
16.14.   Egypt aligns itself with the African Group's stance in response to the Cairns Group's paper 
on the multilateral trading system's role in sustainable agriculture and food systems. Our 
appreciation extends to the Cairns Grou p for their submission.  We share concerns, as outlined in 
paragraph 1.1 of this submission, about global environmental and food security challenges, 
emphasizing the need for collective action. Egypt supports the Cairns Group's vision of a fair, 
equitable, and market -oriented agricultural trading system, adaptable to the diverse needs of all 
members.  
16.15.   We reaffirm our commitment to multilateral environmental, development, and food security 
goals, aligning with the UNFCCC and its Paris Agreement. Egypt looks fo rward to collaborating with 
the Cairns Group to foster a non -distorted, rules -based international agricultural trade system that 
supports global food security and enhances environmental outcomes.  Additionally, Egypt seeks 
common ground with the Cairns Grou p on Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture. Acknowledging 
the Cairns Group's recognition, as stated in paragraph 6, that there is no one -size-fits-all approach 
to improving sustainability in agriculture, we are eager for further discussions.  
16.16.   We concur  with the African Group's emphasis on integrating the Ministerial mandate on PSH 
into the narrative of food security. We support the call for a ministerial outcome in Abu Dhabi 
addressing food security and livelihoods.  Highlighting the importance of allowi ng Developing 
Countries greater policy space, Egypt recognizes the need for reform in the agricultural trade support 
architecture. We agree with the African Group that advocating further market liberalization is 
premature while constraints persist due to A oA rules and substantial subsidies in developed 
countries. Egypt commits to constructive engagement with the Cairns Group and fellow Members, 
working collaboratively to achieve an effective WTO solution to global food insecurity.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 107 - 
 
  16.17.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
16.18.   I would like to add to what other s have already expressed, especially the African Group 
coordinator and also just to implore the different groups, the African Group, the Cairns Group and 
others to work together t o ensure that we do not  only liberalize agriculture, but that we pay attention 
to the specific needs of developing countries. I do sense that we are coming closed on many issues 
where previously there have been differences. Let us  not waste the opportunity , the widow is open 
but it will not stay so for long.  
16.19.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
16.20.   The unilateral adoption of trade restrictive measures with extraterritorial application, such 
as due diligence, anti -deforestation laws, MRLs that are not science -based, and mirror clauses, is a 
threat to the multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core.  The claim that they are being 
adopted under the umbrella of environmental policies is but an attempt to green wash protectionism.  
16.21.   The unilateral adoption of trade -restrictive measures with extraterritorial application will 
increase even further the burden and costs of transaction and compliance to agricultural producers, 
especially in developing countries.  
16.22.   That will hinder their prog ress in securing a "share in the growth in international trade 
commensurate with the needs of their economic development", as prescribed in the Marrakesh 
Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization.  
16.23.   In the worst -case scenario, agricultural producer s from developing countries could be 
downright excluded from value chains.  Such measures will lead to regulatory fragmentation and 
prevents the furthering of international regulatory cooperation, for it creates a conflictive dynamic  
between exporters and i mporters with negative consequences on sustainable development on its 
three pillars.  
16.24.   The 11 guiding principles in WT/GC/261  provide the basis for a fair and equitable transition 
towards more sustainable agricultural and food systems that not implodes the MTS. We call on all 
Members to respect them and stress our commitment  to work with other WTO Members and groups.  
16.25.   The repr esentative of Chinese Taipei  delivered the following statement:  
16.26.   We recognize the submission's support of the idea that a rule -based and well -functioning 
multilateral trading system can contribute to global food security. It also correctly points out that 
different Members have unique agricultural production conditions, circumstances and practices and 
there is no "one size fits all" approach for improving sustainability outcomes in agriculture.  
16.27.   We would like to note that it is also because of the different natural conditions and production 
patterns among Members, an agricultural policy of the same form may have different effects on or 
contribution to any distortions and sustainability.  One particular point that the Cairns Group's 
submission misses mentioning  is that agriculture plays a multifunctional role in ensuring food 
security, protecting the environment and many other non -trade aspects.  
16.28.   Due to such unique nature of agriculture, a policy on agricultural trade cannot be judged 
purely based on a technical  calculation of economic efficiency. The valuable positive aspects arising 
from agricultural support to enhance environmental sustainability and from its positive non -trade 
roles should also be fairly recognized.  
16.29.   The representative of Chile delivered the following statement:  
16.30.   Chile thanks Australia for presenting document G/AG/GEN/222  on behalf of the Cairns 
Group. We endorse the points made with regard to promoting fairer and more equitable international 
agricultural trade, capable of resp onding to the challenges related to food security, environmental 
sustainability and climate change. Among these points, my delegation draws attention to the 
recognition of the agricultural production characteristics and methods unique to each country, as 
there is no one -size-fits-all approach to addressing agricultural sustainability; and the 
implementation of practices that help agri -food systems adapt to a changing climate, reduce WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 108 - 
 
  greenhouse gas emissions, eradicate hunger and safeguard global food securi ty, with the 
participation and leadership of women, Indigenous Peoples and rural communities.  
16.31.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
16.32.   China thanks the submission from the Cairns Group. Though as a major agricultural and food 
net impo rter, we share many similar views with the group members in promoting sustainable and 
resilient agricultural and food system. We believe that sustainable agriculture is essential for 
improving food security, nutrition, economic development, and that enviro nmental policies and 
outcomes should not be designed for protectionist purpose. We share the increasing concern about 
the significant surge in the adoption of various forms of unilateral trade -related environmental 
measures. We agree with the view highligh ted in the paper, particularly regarding the potential 
misuse of trade measures in the pursuit of environment goal and the application of one -size-fits-all 
approach to Climate Change and mitigation and adaptation.  
16.33.   On agricultural subsidy, given the differe nt nature of subsidies, different needs and 
development stages of members as well as different per capita support level, we agree that the "one 
size fits all" approach should not be the choice. Under existing rules of A oA, green transition support 
measures  should be encouraged by members for sustainable development while exploring feasible 
domestic reform modality aiming at leveling the playing field. We hope members could continue to 
have objective and data -based and science -based discussions in the CTE on  the role of agricultural 
subsidy to the environment, which we believe could be a positive complementary to the agricultural 
reform and negotiations in C oA SS. 
16.34.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
16.35.   We associate ourselves with the  statement delivered on behalf of the African Group on this 
issue. As stated by the African Group, this paper is yet another attempt to reset the agriculture 
negotiating agenda by pitching a narrative of food security that harps completely on trade 
liberal ization while ignoring Ministerial mandates on critical food security instruments such as PSH 
and SSM. In our view, this approach cannot proffer solution to food security challenges.  
16.36.   We believe that the proposals submitted by the African Group including t he joint African 
Group, ACP and G33 proposal on PSH are those related to tools for addressing food security and 
crises. Nigeria and a vast majority of Developing countries and LDCs have outlined for a long time 
that a solution to long -term food security ch allenges for us is through the delivery of the mandated 
outcomes on the issues under negotiations at the C oA SS; PSH, SSM, and domestic support that 
addresses the inequitable elements of DS such as AMS entitlements, trade distorting forms of Green 
Box and Blue Box, and strengthens and upholds S&D. These can allow Developing Countries greater 
policy space to support product and livelihoods.  
16.37.   We believe that without an assessment of the cost of 28 years of liberalization of agricultural 
markets under the WTO, and the failure to get the developed countries to remove their subsidies, 
the same prescription cannot again be adopted as solution for long term food security across the 
developing world.  We look forward to engaging constructively with all members so we can 
collectively proffer effective solutions to food insecurity difficulties.  
16.38.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
16.39.   The multilateral trading system can and should contribute to the resilience and 
transformation of the agrifood s ystems falling within its mandate. In this regard, the best way for 
the WTO to contribute is by concluding the agricultural reform process.  
16.40.   The substantial and progressive reduction of trade distortions and protections in the 
agricultural sector will help ensure greater predictability for trade in agricultural products, the 
diversification of sources of origin and stability in supply chains. In addition, it will allow for resources 
to be used and distributed more efficiently, which would result in higher ou tput with a lower 
environmental impact, enabling better conservation.  
16.41.   However, this will involve more than just the reform process, which would improve conditions 
in the future. To prevent the current conditions from being undermined, it will also require strict WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 109 - 
 
  compliance with the existing rules, both in the relevant WTO Agreements and the international legal 
obligations undertaken in other forums, such as those of an environmental nature, including 
Articles  2.1(b) and  2.2 of the Paris Agreement.  
16.42.   We recall  that advancing together towards our common goals requires cooperation, 
negotiation and the non -imposition of unilateral measures.  We encourage Members to work 
collaboratively to recognize good agricultural practices that contribute to sustainability and a re 
adapted to national needs and circumstances and to facilitate the adoption, transfer and use of 
technology that helps to improve the productivity, sustainability and resilience of agrifood systems.  
16.43.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following  statement:  
16.44.   We appreciate the work of colleagues from the Cairns Group in putting together this 
document.  On this note, we would like to reaffirm our well -known position regarding the issue of 
domestic support.  
16.45.   At the same time, there are some merits and a lignments with our views in some of the 
paragraphs in the Statement, including appropriate recognition of each country's unique agriculture 
situation, and on the imposition of environment -related trade measures that constitute a means of 
arbitrary or unjus tifiable discrimination, or a disguised restriction on international trade, as well as 
excessive compliance requirements.  There are among issues that we would continue working 
together in future agriculture negotiation in the WTO.  
16.46.   The representative of Japan delivered the following statement:  
16.47.   We appreciate the contribution from the Cairns group.  We recognize the statement contains 
points that Japan agrees with, such as "there is no 'one size fits all' approach for improving 
sustainability outcomes in agricu lture" or "avoid unjustified trade restrictions".  In the meantime, 
with regard to the point that "the majority of agricultural subsidies in the world are distortive and 
harmful to the environment and health", Japan does not agree with the view that agricul tural 
subsidies generally have a negative impact on the environment, and in fact, Japan designs and 
implements agricultural subsidies in a way not to have a negative impact on the environment, but 
rather to have a positive impact. We hope that the discussi on on sustainability of agriculture be 
conducted using a fact -based perspective.  
16.48.   The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
16.49.   With regard to Agenda item 16, we thank Australia for presenting the statement, in which 
Malaysia is also on e of the co -sponsors.  We wish to stress and reemphasize  the importance of a fair, 
facilitative and transparent agricultural trade system, in the face of global environmental and food 
security challenges. Sustainable agriculture plays a pivotal role in enha ncing food security, fostering 
economic development and promoting environmental sustainability. As we move forward, it is 
imperative that our policies promoting sustainable agriculture prioritize  long-term sustainability, 
rather than being driven by protec tionist objectives.  
16.50.   In this regard, Malaysia wishes  to reaffirm our unwavering support for the multilateral 
trading system, with the WTO at its core - upholding WTO principles and agreements, such as the 
Agreement on Agriculture, TBT and SPS. In our quest of sustainable agricultural trade, we must 
avoid unjustified trade restrictions and burdensome compliance requirements. Most importantly, we 
must address the distortionary and harmful effects of global agricultural support, paving the way for 
a more sustai nable and equitable global agricultural landscape.  In conclusion, we call upon all 
Members to collaborate and promote sustainable and resilient agriculture and food systems, and on 
this note, Malaysia stands ready to engage constructively with all Members in this crucial agenda.  
16.51.   The representative of the Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
16.52.   The Philippines has co -sponsored the Cairns Group sustainability statement, which advocates 
that sustainability should not be seen as a trade barrier that hinders international trade. This 
statement emphasizes the significance of implementing sustainabilit y measures that are based on 
scientific evidence, transparent in their implementation, and non -discriminatory in their application. 
Many of the elements found in the Cairns Group statement are reflected in the COP28 Declaration WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 110 - 
 
  on Sustainable Agriculture, Resilient Food Systems, and Climate Action, which has garnered the 
support of 158 countries.  
16.53.   The statement emphasizes the importance of sustainable agriculture in ensuring food 
security, reducing environmental impacts, and improving livelihoods in rural co mmunities. 
Sustainable practices not only ensure the long -term viability of agricultural systems but also 
contribute to the well -being of future generations. With the world's population steadily increasing, it 
is crucial to adopt sustainable approaches tha t can meet the growing demand for food while 
safeguarding the environment.  The Philippines looks forward to working with the general 
membership in including these elements as part of a food security outcome at MC13.  
16.54.   The representative of the Russian Federa tion delivered the following statement:  
16.55.   With regards to the Statement by the Cairns Group on sustainable and resilient agriculture 
and food systems, we share the view that trade -related environmental measures should not lead to 
unjustified unilateral restr ictions on trade.  One of the guiding principles underlying the introduction 
of measures for the sake of legitimate objectives is an application of a science and evidence -based 
approach. That should be relevant for the policies encouraging sustainable agric ulture production.  
16.56.   We also call on a comprehensive approach to the concept of sustainable agriculture, that 
includes not only environmental, but also social and economic components. Moreover, achievement 
of Sustainable Goals should not cause food crises an d increase in global hunger. We believe that 
introduction of sustainable elements in agriculture policy and production practices should be subject 
to their impact assessment on food security, in particular, on production and prices.  
16.57.   The representative of t he European Union  delivered the following statement:  
16.58.   The European Union thanks the Cairns Group for their submission, which, in our view, rightly 
underlines the need for urgent action in view of climate change. We are in a global emergency that 
goes beyond  national borders. We have set ambitious targets in the Paris agreement and made a 
significant commitment last December in the Global Biodiversity Framework.  
16.59.   Last week in Dubai, 134 World Leaders signed up to the COP28 landmark agriculture, food, 
and clima te action Declaration. It lists our common commitments and declares the intent to work 
collaboratively and expeditiously to pursue a series of commonly agreed -upon objectives.  The 
situation requires all of us to further step up our efforts, both internatio nally and through 
autonomous measures. The question is not if, but how we design and implement these measures. 
We need to develop them in a way that achieves environmental objectives and minimizes  impacts 
on trade. That can only be done through transparenc y and dialogue with trading partners.  
16.60.   The COP28 Declaration is our basis for action, and we must deliver on this common 
agreement. The WTO Membership needs to focus on its area of expertise. We concur with the Cairns 
Group that the multilateral trading sys tem must contribute to sustainable and resilient food systems, 
with the WTO at its core and in accordance with its agreements. The European Union stands ready 
to share our experience on designing sustainable and resilient agricultural policies based on non -
trade distortive Green Box compliant measures.  
16.61.   The representative of Canada  delivered the following statement:  
16.62.   We are pleased as Canada to co -sponsor the Cairns Group Statement, and we would really 
like to echo the words of Australia, South Africa and Ni geria that on agriculture, the Cairns Group 
and the African Group have more in common than not. There really is a unique opportunity for us 
right now, and Canada stands ready to engage constructively and energetically to move us forward.  
16.63.   The representativ e of Thailand  delivered the following statement:  
16.64.   As co -sponsor, I would like to emphasize that we are one of members of the Cairns Group 
who have been co -sponsoring. We recognize the critical relevance and urgency of addressing climate 
change and environme ntal challenges. We understand that it is critical and to ensure at the same 
time that international trade rules and principles, particularly those established by the WTO are 
respected.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 111 - 
 
  16.65.   We would just like to draw attention to paragraph s 7, 8 and 9 , which we fully support. But 
we would also like to underscore the importance of improving productivity, resilience and 
sustainability of agriculture practices and food systems to investment, R&D, innovation as well as 
appropriate transfer of technology.  
16.66.   The repre sentative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
16.67.   Thank you to the Cairns Group for their statement. As the OECDs said, agricultural markets 
are facing a triple challenge providing adequate, affordable, safe, nutritious food for a growing global 
population. Providing livelihoods all along the food value chain, and at the same time, whilst 
increasing the sustainability of the agricultural sector. We all need to be thinking about how we align 
our work across different WTO fora, and wider inte rnational fora, and have a serious conversation 
about sustainability and resilient food systems.  
16.68.   We also really welcome the statement out of COP28; the declaration on sustainable 
agriculture, food system, and climate action. This calls for exactly the stre ngthening of the rules 
based multilateral trading system, with this Organization , with its fantastic leadership, at its very 
core.  
16.69.   A multifaceted problem requires a multifaceted solution. And that includes elements 
highlighted in this Cairns Group declara tion, including progressing agricultural reform, to promote 
fair, rules -based, market orientated, agricultural trade. Key to that effort is repurposing the way in 
which public support is directed towards agriculture to improve the activity, the resilience and 
sustainability of agricultural practices and systems. So it is absolutely right that we have a serious 
conversation about sustainability, about resilience of our food systems, here in this Organization , as 
part of a wider conversation we need to have u rgently, about how we use this Organization , and the 
trading system to support the transition to net zero and save our planet.  
16.70.   The representative of New Zealand  delivered the following statement:  
16.71.   In this intervention, I would like to cover items 13 and 11,  as well as item 16 this morning. 
On the statement on sustainable, resilient agriculture and food systems presented this morning by 
Australia from the Cairns Group, New Zealand supports the call for greater dialogue and cooperation 
on trade -related environ ment measures at the WTO. This helps us to ensure that our respective 
efforts to drive more sustainable agriculture and food systems are in line with our WTO commitments 
and do not pose additional barriers to trade. As others have emphasized, there is no o ne-size-fits-
all approach to environmental sustainability, which have different natural environments and 
production systems and consequently, will use different approaches and tools to achieving the same 
outcome of enhanced environmental sustainability.  In this regard, New Zealand shares the overall 
objectives and principles set out in the Cairns Group statement, and looks forward to working with 
other Members in striving for multilateral coherence in respect to trade -related environmental 
measures to the W TO. 
16.72.   On the earlier item from Singapore ( WT/GC/W/908 ), we recognize the value of enhanced 
transparency of export restrictions and in particular, the importance of ensuring open, fair and 
predictable markets, including stable trade flows to net food importing countries, especially LDCs. 
There have been a num ber of proposals on export restrictions put forward on the Committee on 
Agriculture, and we would encourage further deliberations on them in that forum. However, 
increased transparency is only one leeway to try to address food insecurity, and not the most 
powerful.  
16.73.   Turning to item 13, the proposal from the African Group on draft Ministerial Decision on 
Promoting Agricultural Production and Trade in NFIDCs  and LDCs, we note that many of the ideas 
on this paper have been raised in the food security Working G roup under the Committee on 
Agriculture, and have also been discussed in the CoA  SS. As we outlined previously, in this working 
group and in the CoA  SS, there are many ways to enhance food security and agriculture production 
within existing rules, and we a re open to discussions on these and on the ideas of these papers on 
those two bodies.  
16.74.   In conclusion, to seriously tackle the underlined issues giving rise to these concerns working 
to address the wider problems, like the very high levels of trade -distortin g domestic support in WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 112 - 
 
  agriculture is vital, so we can achieve a more resilient, food secure global trading system. This is 
why New Zealand remains committed to a comprehensive and holistic approach to agriculture and 
trade reform under Article 20 of the Ag reement on Agriculture, and as the ambassador from Nigeria 
has said, it is high time that we achieve positive outcomes.  
16.75.   The representative of Costa Rica  delivered the following statement:  
16.76.   Costa Rica is pleased to co -sponsor this statement. As we highlighte d under item 14 on the 
proposal by the African Group, Costa Rica has systemic and trade concerns about the increase in 
non-tariff barriers in agricultural trade. Accordingly, we encourage Members to respect the WTO 
Agreements relating to agriculture and to  commit to moving forward decisively with the rules reform, 
in line with Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture.  
16.77.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
16.78.   The document presented contains several important elements that Switzerland and other 
G10 Members put forward in past discussions. To underline two of them: 1) we agree with the 
statement that sustainable agricultural practices are indispensable to ensure food security and 
nutrition in the long -term; 2) we welcome the recognition of country -specific contexts and the fact 
that this means that a one size fits all approach will not bring us forward, as also emphasized  by 
Ambassador Mina.  
16.79.   Non-trade concerns are  also relevant in this context, as mentioned e.g., by Chinese Taipei.  
Switzerland stands ready to engage constructively on these questions in the relevant fora.  
16.80.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
16.81.   India would like to thank Cairns  Group proponents for their proposal. Some of the items in 
this proposal are contradictory from what we hear from Cairns  Group members as well as some of 
the other Members i.e., five Members who have presented Agenda 16. Let me highlight that 
contradiction  between what we hear and what is written. In 6 out of the 11 items, Cairns  Group 
members have recognized that different Members have unique agricultural production conditions, 
circumstances and practices and there is no one size fits all approach for impr oving outcomes in 
agriculture, but at the same time, the same group of Members have said that no one size fits all, 
what the group is saying, if done, agriculture negotiation will proceed. Now, how it is unique and 
how it is different for different countri es, I would like to just put some numbers here. If you look at 
sustainable livelihood in case of India, it is about more than 250 million people are participating in 
agriculture either as cultivator or agricultural laborers.  
16.82.   If I put that number in global  context except India, there are maybe three countries  - United 
States , China and Indonesia maybe having more than 250 million population. So, you are talking 
about a group of people who are doing sustainable cultivation and livelihood support and what cou ld 
be more sustainable, which is demonstrated in the form of proposal JOB/AG/229  covering 70 per  
cent of total global population. And asking that one program has delivered as a sustainable program 
only accept it but please start negotiation. So, I think we need to come clear on things apart from 
the niceties and love, we should not block such negotiations where actually sustainable livelihood is 
taking place, and it is helping so many people.  
16.83.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
16.84.   The United States would like to tha nk the Cairns Group for its submission . The Contribution 
of the Multilateral Trading System to Sustainable and Resilient Agriculture and Food Systems.  It is 
critical that we build and promote sustainable and resilient agri -food systems to ensure that there  
is enough food to feed everyone,  and that affordable food can reach everyone, especially our most 
vulnerable populations.  
16.85.   The United States shares the deep concern noted by the Cairns Group regarding the global 
food security and environmental challenges t hat face all of us. We note that this paper touches on 
similar key concepts as expressed in the U S submission, The WTO's Role in Enhancing Food Security 
(JOB/AG/240 ). Among these concepts, I would like to point out three that we consider critical:  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 113 - 
 
  16.86.   First, the  WTO and its rules have contributed positively toward global food security. As 
Members, we should seek to uphold and build upon these rules to ensure continued and strengthened 
global food security into the future, which will include mitigating the effects  of climate change. 
Second, the importance of science - and evidence -based measures, allowing for place and scale 
appropriate sustainable agricultural practices, and avoiding prescriptive approaches that ultimately 
could undermine the achievement of global sustainability and food security goals.  
16.87.   Lastly, we'd like to emphasize the importance of enabling farmers worldwide to access 
modern tools and technologies to increase crop yield while optimizing land, water, and other 
agricultural resources and inputs. W e look forward to continuing  engaging with the Cairns Group and 
all WTO Members to explore ways that the WTO and its Members can contribute to global food 
security challenges.  
16.88.   The representative of Argentina  delivered the following statement:  
16.89.   On the propo sal I will not speak because you know  what I think, the only thing I would share 
with you is that what we are doing at the WTO, I was able and had the privilege to see on the 
ground, in my experience as Ambassador in Mozambique . The enormous potential that  this 
Organization facilitating trade can have to change the lives of people all over the world regarding 
food security. Mozambique is the most important experience I had in my whole career. 36 million 
hectares  of arable land, exactly the same arable land as Argentina. They only do agriculture on 
5 million hectares, we do agriculture on 34 million hectares.  Therefore, what we  do here, beyond 
papers, is very important because we are changing the lives of people. I think what the Cairns Group 
is trying to do today is precisely to show that our Article 20 -battle is a battle of the future, not a 
battle of the past. Our responsibility is to put all the elements of the future in to something , which is 
essential and fulfilling our past.  
16.90.   The representative of Australia  delivered the following statement:  
16.91.   Thank you for all the expressions of love, expressed in a variety of different ways. I know 
that the response by the Ambassador of Cameroon, the  Africa n Group coordinator, to our paper was 
also an expression of love , but we need to work on this together, I think. There is scope for dialogue 
between us.  
16.92.   The Director -General  delivered the following statement:  
16.93.   What has struck me are the numerous cont ributions on agriculture and food security. One 
advantage is sitting back and listening to all of them. It shows a very strong desire in this Council  
to have an outcome in this area. If you listen there are quite a few similarities in the proposals that 
have been put forward , as there are differences as well, and I acknowledge that. I want today, on 
the 30th anniversary of the conclusion of the Uruguay Round, read a quote because I think it will 
help us with the issue of agriculture. 30 years ago, one of my  predecessors Peter Sutherland, who 
was the Director -General called the successful conclusion of the Uruguay Round on 
15 December  1993, a defining moment in modern economic and political history. He said, "Today 
the world has chosen openness and cooperatio n instead of uncertainty and conflict". He was speaking 
to the TNC at the time. I wanted to read  this to you  because I think I sense a spirit of cooperation. 
There is a moment of cooperation where we can come around and try to get an outcome on 
agriculture  that delivers something for the farmers  whom  we are all concerned about and set forward 
a path for the future. That  is all I want – let us  try to do that. I am hopeful now after listening to all 
of you. Thank you.  
16.94.   The General Council took note  of the stat ements.  
17  EUROPEAN UNION REGULATION ON SUPPLY CHAINS FREE FROM DEFORESTATION 
AND FOREST DEGRADATION – COMMUNICATION FROM ARGENTINA, COLOMBIA, 
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, GUATEMALA, HONDURAS, PANAMA, PARAGUAY, AND PERU 
(WT/GC/W/912 ) 
17.1.   The Chairperson  invited Honduras to introduce, on behalf of the co -sponsors, the item 
"European Union Regulation on Supply Chains Free from Deforestation and Forest Degradation" 
(WT/GC/W/912 ).  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 114 - 
 
  17.2.   The representative of Honduras  delivered the following statement , on behalf o f the 
co-sponsors : 
17.3.   In relation to this item, we would like to reiterate our firm commitment to environmental 
principles, particularly in the battle against deforestation and forest degradation. We are, however, 
deeply concerned about the way in which the E uropean regulation addresses these matters. While 
a more detailed statement will be sent to the Secretariat, in general terms, we urge the European 
Union to review its unilateral environmental regulations, which are causing poverty and generating 
tensions among WTO Members. In spite of the discussions that have taken place in the 
WTO committees, the concerns of the affected countries have not been taken into account, and the 
WTO General Council is the only option for addressing this issue. The regulation pe nalizes, diverting 
attention from the real causes of the problem and shifting responsibility to countries that are less 
responsible.  
17.4.   The key word is therefore "trust". We are faced with institutionally designed trade measures 
that are regressive and, in ou r view, have a marginal environmental impact. Those affected by the 
measures have no protective mechanisms because they are the most vulnerable actors in faraway 
countries. There are no effective discussion forums that allow for dialogue and truly meaningf ul 
constructive cooperation. This situation in which dialogue is impossible undermines trust; it 
generates reactions and an interest in searching for legal and political alternatives, which 
unfortunately makes the discussions on environmental provisions in  this Organization even more 
difficult. Creating poverty and penalizing a very specific vulnerable sector, rather than focusing on 
those that are really responsible, is not the appropriate multilateral path for trade measures that 
seek to address global en vironmental problems.  
17.5.   For this reason, and in the absence of better mechanisms, we are bringing the discussion 
before the General Council. While this is an unusual agenda item in that it refers to a specific country, 
it affects all of us. We urge the Europ ean Union and other Members of this Organization to engage 
in open and sincere discussions on public trade and environmental policy – discussions that are not 
merely informative, but also effective and cooperative.  
17.6.   The representative of Peru delivered the following statement:  
17.7.   Peru welcomes and echoes the statement made by Honduras. Exports of the products covered 
by the regulation account for a significant share of Peru's exports to the European Union. Some of 
these products, such as cocoa and coffee, have value chains made up of thousands of small -scale 
producers, whose livelihoods through trade may be impacted by measures such as the one under 
discussion today. Moreover, for countries like Peru, the European regulation will not only affect trade, 
but also security policies, specifically with respect to efforts to combat drug production through the 
substitution of illicit crops.  
17.8.   As we have reiterated in other forums, we are concerned that there are still many aspects of 
the European regulation that remain unclear or require supplementary regulations. This means that 
the actual time frame that operators have to make the necessary adjustments for compliance will, 
in reality, be far shorter than the 18 -month time frame established by the regulation. Sim ilarly, we 
note that the regulation fails to specify which documents are required for compliance. It does not 
define procedural steps or set any fixed time frames, meaning that both operators and the European 
Union authorities have considerable discretion and that there is, thus, a lack of predictability in the 
regulatory landscape. The European Union has said that the regulation will be applied as of 
30 December 2024. However, we do not when supplementary regulations will be finalized.  
17.9.   From our point of vi ew, in addition to asserting that the implementation deadline is non -
negotiable, the European Union should provide clarity and certainty about the implementation of all 
aspects of the regulation. Peru is committed to addressing the threats of climate chang e, global 
warming and deforestation, and has therefore implemented strategies and regulations in this area. 
Of course, we agree with the European Union's objective. However, we believe that in order to 
achieve this, measures that unnecessarily restrict tra de should be avoided.  
17.10.   We cannot lose sight of the fact that one of the drivers of deforestation is poverty and a lack 
of opportunities to earn an income legally. In that context, international trade is certainly a valuable 
tool that we need to encourage. I n our case, cocoa and coffee, which fall within the scope of the WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 115 - 
 
  European Union's regulation, are crops that currently help thousands of small -scale producers to 
abandon the illicit crops that fuel drug trafficking. Lastly, we reiterate our request to the European 
Union to respond in writing to the questions we circulated together with other Members regarding 
details of the regulation.  
17.11.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
17.12.   Brazil thanks the co -sponsors for the initiative of submit ting this document. My delegation 
shares the concerns expressed by Honduras and Peru . The avoidance of protectionist trade measures 
and the adherence to effective multilateral disciplines are indispensable to ensure responsiveness of 
the multilateral tradi ng system to environmental objectives. At the same time, it is essential to 
promote  transparency of trade measures used for environmental purposes and of environmental 
measures which have significant trade effects, while abiding by the multilateral rules. Regarding the 
document circulated by Colombia, I would like to express Brazil`s overall support for the spirit of 
the text . Our capital officials are currently analyzing specific elements of the document`s language 
with a view to cosponsoring it.  
17.13.   The representative of India delivered the following statement16: 
17.14.   On the agenda, we thank the co -sponsors, particularly Honduras who presented , on behalf 
of the co-sponsor s, for bringing this particular issue to the General Council, which we have discussed 
at lengt h in Committee on Trade and Environment. Chair, our paper JOB/TE/78 /Rev.1 submitted 
jointly with South Africa highlights our broad concerns with the growing list of environment related 
trade measures. Despite claiming to make an environmental impact, these measures exclude from 
design the well -established principles of glo bal environmental law such as common but differentiated 
responsibilities (CBDR), respective capabilities and the concept of nationally determined 
contributions (NDCs). It was heartening to listen to our colleague from EU today reiterating the COP 
outcome a nd I hope that the outcome in  
17.15.   COP21 on common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR), respective capabilities (RC) 
and nationally determined contributions (NDCs) later on would be respected by EU in future. 
Specifically in the case of this EU deforest ation regulation, we have voiced our concerns both 
bilaterally as well as here in the WTO. This regulation qualifies as a perfect example of a typical non -
tariff measure, blocking the market access of developing countries to the EU market, while providing 
no evidence that the regulation will meet the intended objectives outlined by the European Union . 
The regulation in its current form, heavily empowers EU's own economic operators in seeking 
business critical data from the exporters, disregards efforts bein g made on afforestation by European 
Union's  trade partners and imposes its own regulatory choices without accounting for the operational 
conditions prevailing in other countries. The regulation will also harm will also harm segments like 
women working as f arm labor, women entrepreneurs in agriculture, as well as the MSMEs whose 
interests the European Union  apparently seeks to preserve in this Organization.  
17.16.   The representative of Panama  delivered the following statement:  
17.17.   As a proponent of this agenda item, Pa nama also wishes to express its deep concern, shared 
by the Panamanian production sector, at this European Union 's Regulation.  A great deal of 
uncertainty remains over its application, particularly with respect to the traceability and geolocation 
requireme nts. The Regulation poses a systemic challenge that affects the entire multilateral trading 
system and the rules on which it is based.  
17.18.   We therefore reiterate our requests for the European Union:  to rapidly craft implementing 
regulations and guidelines that  provide clarity to operators and producers from third countries, 
specifying the requirements, stages and time frames of each procedure; to incorporate differentiated 
compliance and due diligence standards tailored to the different situations of developing  countries, 
in order to foster an environmentally conscious but also equitable and inclusive regulation; to provide 
developing countries with assistance comparable to the one received by their own producers and 
operators to avoid discrimination that furthe r skews the playing field; to provide appropriate 
cooperation to retribute conservation efforts to countries with comparatively high rates of 
 
16 Following the meeting, the delegation of India submitted subsequently their oral and written statements 
to the Secretariat for inclusion in th e record. India's written statements have been included in the Annex, as 
requested.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 116 - 
 
  conservation; and to provide for more stringent rules and cut -off dates for restoration applicable to 
its own prod ucers, and refrain from applying its conservation ideals in a discriminatory and 
extraterritorial manner.  
17.19.   Panama is one of the very few carbon -negative countries.  Although we share the 
European  Union's environmental objectives, we reiterate that they canno t be achieved by regulating 
the production of third countries through a one -size-fits-all approach.  
17.20.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
17.21.   China shares the objective of the European Union  in combating illegal deforestation and 
promo te sustainable development to protect environment. However, we have some concerns 
regarding the potential impact of the regulation on the supply chain as well as the livelihood of small 
farmers in developing members. China has consistently of the view that  environment measures and 
trade measures could and should be mutually supportive.  
17.22.   In this regard, we would like to associate with our statement on item 19, under which we 
will emphasize that multilateral and cooperative solutions are the only way of addre ssing global 
environmental challenges, and call for WTO Members to enhance multilateral deliberative function 
on environment -related trade measures or trade -related aspects of environmental policies and foster 
sustainable development. We are looking forward to concrete and meaningful discussions with the 
Europea n Union  and othe r Members in  the CTE. 
17.23.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following statement:  
17.24.   We thank those Members who co -sponsored and supported the submission of the document. 
The support of Members from different regions and with different l evels of development is proof of 
the concern caused by this measure and, like it, other unilateral measures with environmental 
objectives and a trade impact. The agenda is already extensive,  and the circulated document is 
available to everyone, so I will b e brief and simply reiterate the importance that Paraguay attaches 
to the achievement of environmental objectives; however, in its current form, this measure does 
not seem to contribute to these objectives, and yet it will have a disproportionate impact on  trade.  
17.25.   To conclude, we once again call on the European Union , as we did in Brussels, "to engage in 
effective cooperation and meaningful dialogue with its partners in the areas of trade and sustainable 
development to jointly address the impact of EU legisl ation and its implementing instruments, 
including providing support to facilitate trade". In addition, as proof of the transparency and true 
spirit of dialogue and cooperation, we look forward to receiving the written replies to the questions 
submitted in the framework of the Committee on Trade and Environment in document 
WT/CTE/GEN/33 . 
17.26.   The representative of Guatemala  delivered the following statement:  
17.27.   We endorse the statement made by Honduras on behalf of a group of Members . We would 
simply like to rei terate that these new regulations pose challenges and difficulties for small -scale 
producers, especially in our developing countries. We are continuing to pursue sustainable 
development commitments and collective environmental goals. However, the different iated 
capacities of our countries need to be taken into account.  
17.28.   The representative of Indonesia  delivered the following statement:  
17.29.   We thank Honduras and other co -sponsors for bringing our attention to this important 
agenda item.  We join others in voicing  our deep concern regarding the E uropean Union's 
Deforestation and Forest Degradation policy.  We maintain this regulation imposes a set of rules that 
are potentially discriminatory in nature. There are many elements in the policy that requires careful 
review – including how it indiscriminately curtail our market access to Europe.  The E uropean Union's 
one-size-fits-all approach, implemented through this model of due diligence , also ignores different 
local conditions – thus rendering smallholders vulnerable.  
17.30.   Smallholders may end up being excluded from global supply chains not because they have 
deforested their land – but because they lack the capacity to prove their compliance to the excessive WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 117 - 
 
  and ever -stringent sustainability criteria imposed.  At the same tim e, we are not yet convinced that 
such measure will create a long -lasting and meaningful impact to the ongoing global efforts to 
address deforestation.  We urge the E uropean Union to conduct open and meaningful dialogue and 
outreach activities, especially to  countries affected by such policy – including its consistency with 
the WTO principles.  As a start, we look forward to seeing the E uropean Union responding 
constructively to legitimate questions posed by the co -sponsors.  
17.31.   The representative of Cameroon , in national capacity  and on behalf of the African Group , 
delivered the following statement:  
17.32.   Cameroon fully share s the concerns that have been expre ssed, in particular by Honduras 
and the sponsors  of the document.  We would like to express to our partners in the EU that these 
measures are counterproductive for our economy, which is basically a forest and agriculture 
economy. We believe that environmen tal protection can be addressed with different solutions in 
mind, however we believe that any measure should be adopted constructively and in close 
consultation with other stakeholders. We will therefore join others in the expression of interest in 
this ma tter.  
17.33.   The African  Group17 thanks the co -sponsors of this communication on the European Union's 
Deforestation Regulation. The African Group shares the European Union's commitment to the 
environment, but has reservations and serious concerns about this Regulation, as we believe that  
the climate agenda should not be used to promote unilateral and protectionist measures and create 
competitive disadvantages  to restrict foreign competition on many products.  
17.34.   The implications of the E uropean Union Deforestation Regulation extend to million s of small 
farmers producing agricultural products. Many small farmers will now face the challenge of assuring 
buyers that they have produced the products lawfully. Why use the concept of fixing land and forests 
in the case of foreign countries, and not us e the concept of deforestation in Europe in its strictest 
sense?  
17.35.   It is important to note that no international agreement calls for the complete conservation 
of forests in their original forms and sizes. In fact, no country could agree to this. The rezonin g of 
agricultural land as construction plots seen in Europe could thus be challenged, as vegetation is 
replaced with concrete, notwithstanding regreening initiatives. Consequently, States have 
undertaken, on the one hand, to manage their forests sustainabl y and, on the other hand, to work 
to preserve biodiversity. This includes reforestation, and the management and protection of 
wetlands. The Regulation also re -examines some provisions of international law.  
17.36.   In addition, the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanis m fails to take into account historic 
contributions of countries to current pollution levels, meaning certain countries and regions such as 
Africa have a favorable  balance. Africa is responsible for less than 5 per cent  of total global 
greenhouse gas emiss ions and is home to the world's second -largest forest lung, the Congo Basin. 
A weighted approach that takes into account common but differentiated responsibilities is not only 
fair, but also consistent with the foundations of international environmental la w. The African  Group 
remains open to any new meaningful discussions or constructive and transparent deliberations.  
17.37.   The representative of Nepal , on behalf of the LDC Group , delivered the following statement:  
17.38.   The LDC Group commends the co -sponsors for their communication on the European Union 
Regulation on Zero Deforestation and Forest Degradation (EUDR).  As we have stated several times 
here in the General Council and in other WTO bodies, we recognize the right of each Member to 
adopt measures to mitiga te the effects of climate change. However, we believe that Members' 
national laws must be compatible with WTO rules as well as the principles of international 
environmental law such as SDT and common but differentiated responsibility.  
17.39.   The E uropean Union's unilateral trade measures adopted under the aegis of environmental 
protection, particularly the EUDR, risk increasing the range of non -tariff measures that our exports 
 
17 The statement was not delivered at the meeting but subsequently sent to the Secretariat for inclusion 
in the record.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 118 - 
 
  already face. This risks further weakening the integration of LDCs into the multilateral  trading 
system.  
17.40.   The EUDR targets a group of seven  commodities: livestock, cocoa, coffee, palm oil, rubber, 
soy, and wood, as well as their derivatives. The majority of these products are exported by LDCs. 
This EU regulation and the strict and unclear crit eria of its benchmarking mechanism and due 
diligence process risk restricting LDC access markets and endangering LDC economies that depend 
on export of these products leading to the loss of hundreds of thousands of jobs and increase in 
poverty in LDCs. These risks  are causing serious socio -political problems in LDCs , as well as waves 
of massive emigration.  
17.41.   LDCs urge the European Union  to seek multilaterally viable and smooth solutions to combat 
deforestation across the world by implementing relevant provisi ons of WTO rules and other 
international instruments to facilitate adaptation to climate change with a view to achieving a better 
impact in terms of mitigating its effects. A clear commitment for environmentally friendly technology 
transfer to developing c ountries and additional climate financing must be ensured in this regard. The 
LDC group also requests to keep the CBDR -RC principle at the heart of any policy on climate and 
environment.   
17.42.   The representative of Dominican Republic  delivered the following st atement:  
17.43.   The Dominican Republic reiterates its support for the communication contained in document 
WT/GC/W/912 . The Dominican Republic is concerned about the actions under the European Union's 
Green Deal, which consists of a package of cross -cutting measure s covering all economic and trade 
activities.  It is important, however, to note that the actions are intended to contribute to a green 
transition that will benefit its citizens and contribute to the global ecosystem, which we welcome. 
However, the initiati ves must be compatible with WTO Agreements.  
17.44.   In this connection, the Dominican Republic reiterates  its commitment to the Sustainable 
Development Goals, the preservation of ecosystems, and environmental sustainability good 
practices. We invite the European U nion to initiate a dialogue on trade and sustainable development, 
with a focus on trade facilitation, thereby jointly advancing the goal of more transparent, resilient 
and participatory international trade. The countries that co -sponsored the document subm itted to 
the General Council account for around 15 per cent of the European Union's imports, and we 
therefore urge other Members to participate in the dialogue as well. We are of the opinion that the 
regulation that the European Union intends to implement would have an adverse impact on 
Dominican exports to the European market, which were valued at over USD 300 million in 2022. For 
this reason, we fear that meeting the objectives of the European Green Deal may undermine the 
gains made in relation to fair tr ade and other economic benefits between the European Union  and 
developing countries in the framework of the WTO and trade -related Economic Partnership 
Agreements. The European Union's pursuit of environmental objectives introduces legal discretion, 
uncerta inty and unpredictability for our exporters, as well as more complex conditions and 
requirements for exports from developing countries.  
17.45.   The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
17.46.   We thank the proponents for their communication regard ing the European Union's 
Deforestation Regulation. Although Malaysia and the proponents are thousands of miles apart, we 
share similar concerns, and Malaysia is of the view that the proposal is timely.  As a background, 
Malaysia, along with 16 other countri es, has expressed our concerns regarding the EUDR in a joint 
letter sent to the European Parliament, European Council, and European Commission in September 
2023. Additionally, we were among the 14 signatories that voiced our concerns on a similar issue, 
in a joint letter sent in July 2022 to the European Parliament and European Council.  
17.47.   Our foremost concern is that the current form of the EUDR overlooks the specific 
circumstances, capabilities, and national legislations of developing producer countries. By  
unilaterally implementing a benchmarking system, the regulation fails to acknowledge and 
understand the efforts made by these countries to combat deforestation; and at the same time may 
potentially violate WTO obligations.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 119 - 
 
  17.48.   Furthermore, the E uropean Union's unilateral approach through due diligence and 
traceability disregards the diverse local conditions. This measure imposes significant costs on 
exporters, importers, producers, and consumers without guaranteeing effective reduction in 
deforestation rates.  
17.49.   In conclusion, we urge the E uropean Union to continue its engagement with other members, 
and to consider all the feedback objectively. Malaysia believes that by working together – we could 
establish 'greater trust' and find a balanced solution that promote sustainable practices, while taking 
into account the unique circumstances and challenges faced by other members.  
17.50.   The representative of Samoa , on behalf of the ACP Group , delivered the following statement:  
17.51.   The ACP Group identifies with some of the concerns expressed in WT/GC/W/912  by the 
co-sponso rs. An overarching concern for us is the impact of the regulation on the capacity of 
smallholder producers in our countries to comply with higher export standards and information 
requirements. This could lead to exclusion of smallholders and Indigenous peo ples and local 
communities from high -value supply chains, due to their lack of resources and know -how to comply,  
which would have adverse consequences for global progress with respect to the achievement of 
SDGs 1, 2, 10 and others.  
17.52.   We believe that the impl ementing acts, regulations and guidelines need to provide adequate 
protection against not only exclusions of smallholders, but protection of the rights of local 
communities to manage and restore forests, and protection against inadvertently exacerbating la nd 
tenure security issues and/or any human -rights risks in developing country producer regions. Such 
protections would ensure that the European Union regulation does not unintentionally exacerbate 
global deforestation, contrary to the regulation's goals. T he regulation is expected to shrink supply 
chains to improve traceability. This may have the unintentional consequence of expanding large 
scale agriculture at the expense of small - scale, leading to greater land conflicts as well.  
17.53.   A just transition to sust ainable global supply chains requires inclusivity, especially for 
smallholders in developing countries. This, in turn, requires greater regulatory incentives for 
operators and traders to involve smallholders. Countries placed in 'higher' risk category, in turn, 
require adequate support to transition to sustainable practices, including through funding and 
development co -operation programmes, such as that of European Union's Forest Partnerships. 
Therefore, we support the call by the co -sponsors for the provis ion of assistance measurable to what 
the European Union provides domestically.  
17.54.   As supply chains can often be difficult and costly to trace, we agree that the concern is real 
that operators and traders subject to the Regulation may shift their sourcing to t he countries 
designated by the European Union as 'low -risk' at the expense of suppliers from 'high -risk countries,' 
even if the latter may be compliant with the requirements of the EUDR. In this regard, more clarity 
is required with respect to the benchmar king systems that the European Union will be utilizing, its 
parameters, and the compatibility issues that have been raised with respect to the 
non-discrimination principles of the WTO.  
17.55.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following st atement:  
17.56.   We would like to echo concerns expressed by Members in respect of the deforestation -free 
regulation. The European Union continues to stick to the practice of introducing unilateral and WTO 
incompatible trade -related restrictive measures under the pretext of environmental protection and 
combating climate change. The consequences associated with the full operation of the policies 
implementing the European Green Deal such as this particular regulation as well as the CBAM appear 
to be distorting tradit ional trade flows and supply chains, undermining Members' rights to apply 
appropriate policies to address environmental challenges as well as decreasing the global prosperity, 
especially of developing countries.  
17.57.   The measures that the E uropean Union attemp ts to justify by "sustainability" are neither 
based on the rules and principles of the Multilateral Trading System nor on global environmental 
agreements. The EU merely aims at protecting its domestic industries from imports and improving 
its competitive a dvantages on global markets.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 120 - 
 
  17.58.   Furthermore, from the systemic standpoint, the EU seeks to replace the concept of a 
"product" as an object of consumption implied in the GATT with the idea that a product is the "result 
of a production process", while complete ly ignoring the current understanding of a "like product" 
which is the result of a long -standing consensus. Along with that, I would like to recall that the 
reasons why this Organization was founded in the first place were to enhance trade and increase 
prosperity rather than create new restrictions.  
17.59.   Bearing all this in mind, I would like to point out that Brussels neglects the attempts to find 
a common solution for the existing challenges at the multilateral level, preferring unilateral agenda 
and trying to establish a friend -shoring approach leading to the fragmentation and destruction of 
the Multilateral Trading System . 
17.60.   The representative of Chile delivered the following statement:  
17.61.   We appreciate the communication from Honduras on behalf of a group of Latin American 
countries. We believe that the urge ncy of the triple climate crisis requires the WTO to strengthen 
and deepen its analysis of how trade can and must help tackle the crisis, but in the least restrictive 
manner possible. In our view, this should be done through discussions on wide -ranging top ics. We 
welcome the communication submitted on this issue. We are examining its substance, and we will 
continue to follow the matter very closely as part of the discussions on trade and environment both 
in this Council and in the CTE.  
17.62.   The representative of  Canada  delivered the following statement:  
17.63.   Canada shares many of the concerns that have been raised today in this room, and we look 
forward to engagement by the European Union  at the WTO on this very important matter.  
17.64.   The representative of Norway  delivere d the following statement:  
17.65.   We would like to thank the proponents for this communication ( WT/GC/W/912 ). Norway 
considers it critical that we tackle deforestation and forest degradation. During the last 15 years, we 
have disbursed more than 5 billion dollars to rainforest protection in developing countries. The 
Norwegian parliament just approved a 30  per cent  increase in the budget for the Norwegian 
International Climate and Forest Initiative for 2024.  
17.66.   Norway has together with 147 other countries and t he European Union signed the Glasgow 
Leaders' Declaration on Forest and Land Use, where we commit to halt and reverse forest loss and 
land degradation by 2030. Forest and land use can contribute as much as one third to reach the 
temperature target of the P aris agreement. More than two thirds of terrestrial biodiversity are found 
in the world's forests. Norway supports a number of tropical forest countries transition to 
deforestation - free value chains. Developing countries cannot stop demand side pressure o n forests 
alone - they need our support.  
17.67.   We view the E uropean Union Deforestation Regulation as an important contribution to the 
reduction of deforestation and forest degradation. At the same time, we do clearly understand that 
this is challenging for many  WTO Members, as illustrated in the communication under discussion. It 
is important that the European Union implements and further develops the Regulation in a manner 
that is transparent and takes into account the concerns of Members that are directly impa cted. We 
commend the European Union's assurances in this regard.  
17.68.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
17.69.   Nigeria shares the same concerns and observation on the EU regulation on this issue. We 
wish to call on the European Union  to further reflect with a view to reviewing the regulation that will 
be both friendly to most of the Members interest. We remain engaged with the European Union  on 
this issue and we hope the European Union  will reflect on it and take into consideration the c oncerns 
of Members on the matter.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 121 - 
 
  17.70.   The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement:  
17.71.   Thailand support s the statement made by Honduras and we want to register our interest in 
the EU's deforestation regulation. In its implementation with our p rivate sector, we have heard a lot 
of concerns, which we have heard today, not only from Thailand. We believe that this one -size-fits-
all approach may not be the most effective solution to arrive at the objective that the European 
Union  is looking for. We also value the EU's attempt to keep transparency and constantly providing 
updates on these measure under the CTE and other information sessions, but we believe that this 
has not been enough, or sufficient.  
17.72.   I met with the private sector here in Geneva two weeks ago and they have specifically talked 
to me about how vague, or how unclear the implementation of this regulation is; particularly in the 
registration of commercial forest, which in Thailand is a bigger part of where we make our products. 
But there i s no way the European Union  can assure how to ascertain the registration of such 
commercial plantations, not indigenous plantations. So, we look forward to continuing the discussion 
on this matter and we would like to seek more clarification from the Europ ean Union , particularly on 
the implementation.  
17.73.   The representative of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela  delivered the following statement:  
17.74.   We wish to thank the group of Latin American countries for submitting document 
WT/GC/W/912 . We reject the applicati on of any unilateral measure that has a negative impact on 
the multilateral trading system, particularly on developing Members and LDCs. We share the Latin 
American group's concern about the regulation in question, which is a clear example of a unilateral 
measure that regulates production in third countries, selects a one -size-fits-all type of solution, is 
the result of insufficient dialogue and creates tensions between multilateral trade and environmental 
regimes.  We wish to reiterate that the WTO has proved to be an organization that is primarily guided 
by economic considerations and sound legal rules. The very definition of unilateralism implies 
conduct that violates principles and rules. In this connection, we call for a return to multilateralism 
as the best way to resolve our differences and we express our support for a forward -looking, 
transparent and inclusive multilateral trading system founded on consensus -based rules.  
17.75.   The representative of Colombia  delivered the following statement:  
17.76.   I would like  to echo the statement made by Ambassador Castillo . With regard to 
decarbonization, we are the first oil -producing country to join the Fossil Fuel Non -Proliferation 
Treaty, and our environmental goals are very ambitious.  With regard to deforestation, we re duced 
deforestation by 70  per cent  last year.  However, despite this, we will be assessed and, regardless 
of the result, our most vulnerable exporters will have to meet requirements that will increase their 
costs and limit their options.  Therefore, although  we are advancing more quickly, being more 
ambitious and seriously discussing fossil fuels and other issues, our producers will still be penalized.  
17.77.   This situation can be improved and needs to be reviewed. The large number and diversity of 
countries concern ed about this issue speak for themselves and  should give our European partners 
pause for thought.  
17.78.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
17.79.   This is an important point for many Members. It is also an important topic for the  European 
Union, which is why we have engaged on the Deforestation Regulation at length in various 
committees), and we have organized several informal sessions and workshops.  We have all made 
the commitment, under the Sustainable Development Goals, to hal t deforestation by 2020. Clearly, 
this has not been achieved. And that is why 143 producer and consumer countries including the 
European Union pledged to halt and reverse forest loss by 2030 as part of the Glasgow Leaders 
Declaration on Forests and Land Us e. If we want to achieve this goal, we need to act. And with 
continued alarming rates of deforestation globally – we need to act now.  
17.80.   The Deforestation Regulation is part of our response. The European Union contributes to 
deforestation by consuming a sign ificant share of products associated with deforestation and forest 
degradation. We therefore have the responsibility to contribute to more sustainable value chains 
and foster more sustainable consumption, production, and trade. But we also understand we ca nnot WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 122 - 
 
  do it alone. We are committed to implementing the Deforestation Regulation in a spirit of close 
partnership, transparency, and open dialogue. This is why we have closely engaged with all 
Members, when preparing the Regulation. And why we have intensif ied these efforts once the 
Regulation was adopted.  
17.81.   These exchanges are a two -way street: on the one hand, we are keen to help business and 
regulators understand the Regulation better; on the other, they are useful opportunities for us to 
better understand concerns, and feed our ongoing reflection on what further tools are necessary to 
facilitate its smooth implementation.  
17.82.   Going forward, we will continue our close engagement with all of you in the run -up to the 
Regulation's entry into application in December  2024 and beyond. Via bilateral channels as well as 
deforestation -specific platforms such as the EU Multi -Stakeholder Platform on Protecting and 
Restoring the World's Forests, or the Initiative on deforestation -free supply chains and the 
Sustainable Cocoa Initiative. We will also continue the dialogue on this matter in the WTO. In 
January, on 9 Januar y, I have invited, Ms. Florika Fink -Hooijer, Director -General of the European 
Commission in charge of the EU's Deforestation Regulation for a dialogue with the  WTO Ambassadors 
in Geneva, which I hope you will be able to attend.  
17.83.   We have also heard your concerns on the risk categorization. This is why we have decided 
to take more time to finalize the assessment, so as to allow for constructive engagement and 
dialogue with trading partners in this regard.  The risk categorization will take into consideration 
objective and internationally recognized data, as well as efforts undertaken to fight deforestation 
and forest degradation nationally and globally. Our intentio n is to prepare this assessment through 
extensive dialogue with interested trading partners.  
17.84.   European Union Delegations throughout the world will be reaching out to your respective 
ministries to invite you to feed the information into the risk assessment p rocess. In addition, we will 
also seek your input on trade facilitating tools (for example, guidelines on implementation, repository 
of best practices on due diligence, or financial support) . We encourage you to share all the 
information that you may consi der relevant, including on ongoing sustainability initiatives at national 
and/or regional level, as well as on emerging best practices.  
17.85.   We can only succeed in halting deforestation if we join forces. We look forward to continuing 
our cooperation and dialog ue to meet our shared climate and biodiversity goals and to protect the 
world's forests for the benefit of all.  
17.86.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
17.87.   The United States shares the E uropean Union's objective in combating deforestation. 
However, we are concerned about the E uropean Union's prescriptive approach. The United States 
appreciates that the E uropean Union has organized multiple sessions to inform WTO members about 
this regulation. However, the United Stat es notes that one -way information sharing sessions are not 
sufficient for all relevant stakeholders to review and comment on this regulation.  
17.88.   The United States requests that the E uropean Union suspend implementation of this 
regulation until it has been no tified to the WTO TBT Committee and to provide adequate time for 
stakeholder comment and  take those comments into account before implementing the final 
regulation.  
17.89.   The representative of Cambodia  delivered the following statement:  
17.90.   Cambodia supports the stat ement made by Honduras, Nepal on behalf of LDC Group and 
other Members who expressed their concern on the European Union's deforestation regulation. 
Cambodia expresses the same concerns over the EUDR and look forward to engaging constructively 
with the EU and other Members in the future.  
17.91.   The representative of Honduras  delivered the following statement:  
17.92.   We would like to thank the delegations that spoke to express their concerns. We would also 
like to thank the European Union for their response . We hope that we will be able to begin an open WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 123 - 
 
  and sincere dialogue , so that we can discuss this in an effective manner that will allow us all to 
achieve ou r environmental goals for the common good of humanity.  
17.93.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
18  INFORMATION ON INVESTMENT FACILITATION FOR DEVELOPMENT – REQUEST FROM 
CHILE AND THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA ( JOB/GC/373  ) 
18.1.   The Chairperson  noted the item "Inform ation on Investment Facilitation for Development" has 
been included in the agenda at the request of Chile  and the Republic of Korea  and invite d one of 
them to introduce the item and the information contained in JOB/GC/373 .  
18.2.   The representative of Chile delive red the following statement:  
18.3.   I am pleased to present the communication contained in document JOB/GC/373 , dated 
4 December 2023, submitted by the Republic of Korea and Chile on behalf of 117 WTO Members 
participating in the Investment Facilitation for Develop ment (IFD) negotiations.  
18.4.   As indicated in the Agenda of the General Council, and following the transparent, inclusive, 
and open nature of the IFD initiative, this item has been requested to inform all WTO Members of 
the following: First, that WTO IFD partic ipants have finalized the English text of the IFD Agreement, 
after completing its legal review. This text, which was circulated to all WTO Members in document 
INF/IFD/W/52  on 27 November 2023, constitutes a major achievement for IFD participants; who 
are currently completing the review of the French and Spanish versions; Second, IFD participants 
intend to make a request in due course to add the IFD Agreement to Annex 4 of t he Marrakesh 
Agreement Establishing the WTO, that is, as an open -ended plurilateral agreement; participants are 
still working on when to make the request, if early at MC13, and, Third, to achieve such 
incorporation, we wish to engage with all WTO Members w ith a view to garnering consensus for the 
IFD Agreement to produce its pro -development benefits.  
18.5.   Let me briefly inform the Membership about key elements and implications of the IFD 
Agreement: Investment facilitation in the WTO is the natural consequence of  the growing inter -
dependency between trade and investment, together with their potential for promoting economic 
growth and development. Attracting not only more, but also more sustainable investment, is 
fundamental especially for developing and LDC Member s to upgrade and diversify their production 
and exports, develop digital infrastructure, encourage technology transfer and innovation, and 
facilitating their integration into global value chains. Investment facilitation is then critical especially 
in the c urrent polycrisis. The focus of the IFD Agreement is not on changing participants' investment 
policies in substance, but on making such investment policies more transparent and investment -
related administrative procedures, more streamlined and efficient.  
18.6.   According to several surveys, this is where investors and businesses most want to see 
investment reforms. In that sense, the IFD Agreement can contribute to make the WTO more 
responsive to the needs of the global economy, governments, as well as domestic a nd foreign 
economic operators.  Providing special and differential treatment, including technical assistance and 
support for capacity building, to developing and least -developed country participants is a key 
component of the IFD Agreement. The IFD Agreement  provides that the extent and timing of 
implementation of its provisions shall be related to the capacities of developing and LDC participants. 
In addition, developing countries and LDCs have the possibility to undertake a Needs Assessment to 
be better pre pared for implementation, including by identifying capacity building support needs.  
18.7.   To conclude, we remain fully available to address any questions regarding the IFD Agreement. 
We invite all WTO Members who have not yet joined to analyze  its benefits and be part of our 
growing number of participants.  
18.8.   The representative of Cambodia  delivered the following statement:  
18.9.   Let me welcome Armenia and Mali who have just recently joined the Investment Facilitation 
for Development, called IFD in short.  I want to begi n by thanking the co -coordinators, Ambassador 
Dr. Sofia and Ambassador Park and all IFD Participants for their tireless efforts and unshakable 
commitment towards the IFD from the beginning to this remarkable stage.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 124 - 
 
  18.10.   Cambodia takes the floor to acknowledge and appreciate the milestone and significant 
progress of the negotiations on the IFD Agreement, starting from a joint statement initiative in 
December 2017 and eventually concluded final text in November 2023. This has been a notable 
achievement of the neg otiation exercise at the WTO. There should be more productive activity like 
this in the organization. With the negotiations amongst over 110 participating WTO Members at all 
levels of development, held in a transparent and inclusive manner since September 2020, we believe 
that the IFD will contribute to creating a more transparent, efficient, and predictable environment 
to facilitate not only more investment, but also more sustainable investment, as well as to support 
for our domestic, bilateral, and region al reform efforts.  
18.11.   As an LDC, Cambodia has participated in the negotiations and will continue to support the 
IFD Agreement. This is because we are in needs of development for our future prosperity. We take 
every moment to think and act upon how we can bes t harvest the benefits from this organization 
through collective efforts from WTO Membership. We see the IFD as one of the best examples of 
development goals to attract more investment and firms into the country, create more jobs for local 
people, strength en our competitiveness and fully integrate ourselves into the multilateral trading 
system.  
18.12.   We are comfortable with the IFD since we will only be required to undertake commitments 
which is consistent with our development and financial needs or administrativ e and institutional 
capabilities. Plus, the special and differential treatment, where technical assistant and capacity 
building are available to support us in implementing the commitment and obligations.  
18.13.   Before I conclude, I hope that the IFD will be real ized and be one of the deliverables at the 
MC13 in Abu Dhabi. We welcome and urge more WTO Members to support and joining the IFD so 
that we can enjoy the benefits from the IFD Agreement.  
18.14.   The representative of Nigeria  delivered the following statement:  
18.15.   We wish to associate ourselves with the statement delivered by Chile and the Republic of 
Korea on this issue.  In July, a vast majority of Members concluded negotiations on the text of the 
Agreement on Investment Facilitation for Development. The conclusion of  the negotiations on this 
commercially meaningful agreement demonstrate that the WTO can indeed deliver results that would 
foster inclusive growth, create more jobs, and widen the circle of prosperity. This is a remarkable 
achievement that should be celebr ated by all Members as the economic benefits for parties and non -
parties are unambiguous.  
18.16.   The IFD agreement is such that would foster closer international cooperation at the global 
level and create a more transparent, efficient, and predictable environment  that will underpin cross -
border flow of investment for the development. We believe it would complement our ongoing efforts 
towards unlocking opportunities in our economy. We are also of the view that the WTO should be 
responsive to the economic priorities  of its members in this 21st century for the institution to remain 
relevant. MC13 should recognize this remarkable achievement and set in motion the process of 
integrating the Agreement on Investment Facilitation for Development into the WTO legal 
architec ture. 
18.17.   In conclusion, we wish to seize this opportunity to congratulate all those that worked 
tirelessly over the last six years towards the conclusion of the negotiations especially the 
co-coordinators of the Joint Initiative.  
18.18.   The representative of El Sal vador  delivered the following statement:  
18.19.   Regarding the agenda item, I would like to thank Ambassador Boza and express my support 
for her statement on the current status and next steps of the Agreement on Investment Facilitation 
for Development. We also rec ognize and appreciate the leadership of both co -coordinators and their 
tireless work and dedication.  
18.20.   I would like to focus on the benefits that this type of agreement will offer developing 
countries and small economies like El Salvador, including its contribution to job creation, technology 
transfer and the expansion and diversification of productive capa city and trade. The Agreement is 
aimed at enhancing transparency and streamlining investment -related processes, making it easier WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 125 - 
 
  for developing countries to participate in global investment flows and thus promoting sustainable 
economic growth.  
18.21.   For this re ason, we support the call by the co -coordinators and the more than 
100 proponents of this joint initiative, including 80 developing Members, to incorporate the 
Agreement into the WTO architecture in a timely manner so that the expected benefits of its 
implementation can be delivered. Lastly, we would like to invite other Members to support the 
Agreement.  
18.22.   The representative of Honduras  delivered the following statement:  
18.23.   I would like to take this opportunity to thank the co-coordinators  for their leadership a nd 
guidance. The IFD Agreement is the product of the diligent and valuable work of 117 Members on 
this issue, which is so important for sustainable development. This milestone marks a significant 
step towards smoother and fairer trade among nations. We wel come the conclusion of the legal 
review of the English text, as well as the ongoing work in Spanish and French.  
18.24.   We urge Members to demonstrate the will and flexibility to build the political momentum 
needed to add the IFD Agreement to Annex 4, and thus at tract and retain higher quality investment, 
taking into account the respective development priorities of Members and fostering a business 
climate more conducive to sustainable development.  
18.25.   The representative of Cameroon  delivered the following statement:  
18.26.   I am making this statement in my national capacity.  I would like to begin by thanking Chile 
and the Republic of Korea for including this item on our work agenda in the General Council and for 
the information provided on investment facilitation for developme nt. Cameroon is a developing 
country that is deeply committed to the structural transformation of its economy. This is also the 
rationale behind our bid to host MC14, for which a number of our friends here in the room who are 
leaving us will be on the spec ial guest list.  
18.27.   The joint initiative on investment facilitation is a powerful vehicle for boosting development. 
By way of example, streamlining and speeding up investment procedures or strengthening frank 
dialogue between the Government and investors are k ey. I am pleased to announce that my country 
has decided to join this relevant initiative in the near future.  Lastly, my delegation commends the 
leadership of Ambassador Li Chenggang  and his country in promoting the initiative.  
18.28.   The representative of Liberi a delivered the following statement:  
18.29.   Liberia wishes to reiterate its support incorporating the Investment Facilitation for 
Development Agreement into Annex 4 of the Marrakesh Agreement. As an LDC, attracting foreign 
direct investment and fostering economic  growth pose unique challenges. We firmly believe the IFD 
Agreement will enable us to harness the advantages of the multilateral trading system and will be a 
blueprint that will ultimately pave the way for sustainable development. Liberia and other LDCs st and 
to gain significantly from the IFD Agreement's focus on transparency, streamlined procedures, and 
efficient administration, increase transparency in investment procedures, streamline bureaucratic 
hurdles, open up avenues for opportunities, especially f or Members with limited trade activity.  
18.30.   While implementing the IFD Agreement may at first sight present challenges, it is not just a 
hurdle to overcome; it is a springboard for progress to showcase our national commitment to reform. 
Successful implementati on will not only demonstrate Liberia's commitment to stability, but also 
unlock its potential to attract investments that spur economic growth and job creation, further 
bolstering its reputation as a trustworthy and reliable trade partner. Therefore, we ca ll on all 
Members to join us in endorsing the incorporation of the IFDA Agreement into Annex 4 of the 
Marrakesh Agreement at the upcoming 13th Ministerial Conference (MC13). This crucial step will 
unlock its transformative potential and make the final Mini sterial Decision by consensus.  
18.31.   The representative of Brazil  delivered  the following statement:  
18.32.   Let me start by thanking Chile and the Republic of Korea for submitting the communication 
on the Investment Facilitation for Development as co -coordinators of th e JSI and on behalf of all WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 126 - 
 
  participants of the initiative.  We align with statements of Chile and the Republic of Korea and 
commend the leadership of Ambassadors Sofia Boza and Jung Sung Park in guiding the negotiations 
of the IFD Agreement to its integral conclusion, after the conclusion of the process of legal review 
last November.  
18.33.   Investment facilitation lies at the center  of Brazi l's approach both to international investment 
agreements, since we developed our model of Cooperation and Investment Facilita tion Agreements 
in 2012, as an alternative to the traditional BIT model focused on investment protection disciplines 
and the ISDS mechanism. Since 2015, Brazil has signed 14  bilateral and regional investment 
agreements with trading partners from developing  and least developed countries. Investment 
facilitation has also been a driving force behind domestic reforms, implemented over the last years, 
to improve the transparency, predictability, and efficiency of our business and investment climate.  
18.34.   Based on our  domestic experience with investment facilitation agreements and reforms, as 
well as findings from international organizations and academia, we firmly believe that the disciplines 
contained in the IFD Agreement will contribute to increase FDI flows to deve loping and least 
developed countries that promote job creation, economic growth, integration into regional and global 
value chains, and ultimately help to achieve the Sustainable Development Goals.  We are of the view 
that the centrality of the development dimension in the JSI on IFD is, to a large extent, a result of 
the active role played by developing countries throughout the negotiations as coordinators, small 
group facilitators, and proponents.  
18.35.   The development dimension of the IFD Agreement is reflecte d in the inclusion of a robust 
set of Special and Differential Treatment (SDT) and Technical Assistance and Capacity Building 
provisions, which provides flexibility and support needed by developing and least developed 
Members for the implementation of the agreement, and also in the strong commitment of 
participants and IOs to support the ongoing process of Investment Facilitation Needs assessment.  
18.36.   We strongly believe that the incorporation of the IFD Agreement to Annex 4 of the Marrakesh 
Agreement as soon a s possible will show that the WTO can deliver agreements that bring social and 
economic benefits to governments, businesses and citizens of the developing and least developed 
members of this Organization, while placing the development dimension at the center of its efforts. 
Brazil calls on all Members to support the legal incorporation of the IFD Agreement and looks forward 
to engaging on constructive discussions on how we can achieve this objective.  
18.37.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following st atement:  
18.38.   Let me thank Chile and Republic of Korea for the updates on IFDA and take note that the 
participating Members have completed the legal review of the English text of the Agreement and are 
currently working on finalizing the French and Spanish versi ons. Pakistan is currently closely 
reviewing the contents of the Investment Facilitation for Development agreement with an unbiased 
view. Pakistan believes that facilitating investment opportunities creates pathways for foreign 
investment which is critical  for economic growth and prosperity specially in developing countries and 
LDCs.  
18.39.   The representative of Panama  delivered the following statement:  
18.40.   We wish to thank the co -coordinators of the Joint Initiative on Investment Facilitation for 
Development for submitting the Agreement at this General Council meeting and for all the work 
done so far to keep up the momentum in these discussions.  
18.41.   Panama recognizes the reinforcing relationship between trade and investment and the key 
role it plays fo r economic development, and the need for closer international cooperation at the 
global level to create a more transparent, efficient and predictable environment for investment.  we 
are confident that this Agreement will help developing and least developed countries to attract, 
expand and retain foreign direct investment flows and to achieve the Sustainable Development 
Goals.  
18.42.   We would like to reaffirm our interest in continuing and intensifying outreach efforts and 
encourage all WTO Members to join these Mem ber-driven discussions, which are open, transparent 
and inclusive.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 127 - 
 
  18.43.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  delivered the following statement:  
18.44.   Hong Kong, China would like to start by expressing our appreciation to Ambassador Sofía 
Boza (Chile) and Ambassador  Jung Sung Park (Korea) for leading over 110 participants in this 
Initiative. H ong Kong China is proud to be part of this journey and we join others in welcoming the 
finalization  of the English version of the IFD Agreement . Today, we have heard from the fl oor how 
the IFD Agreement could benefit WTO Members at all development stages, in particular the most 
vulnerable ones. I would recall that the ultimate goal of this organization is to improve the welfare 
of people around the world.  
18.45.   In the first paragraph of the Marrakesh Agreement, Ministers of all founding members of the 
WTO salute the historic achievement they have made, which they believe will strengthen the world 
economy and lead to more trade, investment, employment and income g rowth throughout the world. 
We certainly hope that our Ministers could proudly say the same at the conclusion of MC13.  
18.46.   Our founding Members , however wise they were, could not have possibly foreseen all the 
challenges that the multilateral trading system w ill have to face today, in particular the modern -day 
challenges of digital economy, environmental sustainability, gender and inclusivity. If we were to 
truly uphold the mission of this organization, the WTO should be responsive to the ever -changing 
environ ments of the time. We recognize  the complementary relationship between investment and 
trade. Investment drives economic growth, fosters transfer of technology, expands and diversifies 
production capacity, as well as promotes sustainable development. There is clear willingness among 
many economies to facilitate foreign direct investment by making their regulatory regimes more 
transparent and streamlined.  
18.47.   Incorporation of plurilateral agreements in the legal framework of WTO is in the DNA of this 
organization . Hong Kong, China  firmly believes that JSIs, including the IFD Agreement, which start 
with plurilateral negotiations amongst like -minded pioneers and conclude with an open offer to all 
Members willing to accept the outcome, are making positive contributio n to the multilateral trading 
system by reinvigorating the WTO's rules -making function.  
18.48.   They strengthen the multilateral trading system by ensuring our rules could adapt to the 
evolving landscape of global trade and respond to aspirations of the people th at we serve.  Hong 
Kong, China  believes the IFD Agreement would be a valuable addition to the WTO rulebook. We call 
on Members to consider joining this initiative.  
18.49.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
18.50.   First, we welcome the com munication by Chile and Korea, and we support it. It will be a 
significant contribution to update the WTO rulebook and deliver concrete benefits. Second, the 
communication represents the collective will of vast majority of Members to integrate this JSI int o 
the WTO architecture. At a time when the MTS is under stress, it is noteworthy that this  JSI enjoys 
widespread support with close to 120 Members from different regions and development status. 
Singapore looks forward to more WTO Members joining this pro -development initiative. The JSI on 
IFD contains sound governance principles on investment authorization procedures, which will help 
developing and LDC Members attract stronger FDI flows and boost economic development.  
18.51.   The representative of Malaysia  delivered the following statement:  
18.52.   We thank the co -coordinators for the tremendous commitment and leadership in steering 
the IFD discussions, especially towards the substantial conclusion in July and recently having 
concluded the legal review. I do not wi sh to try to repeat or sell the benefits of the IFDA, as the 
support shown by more than two thirds reflects the importance of this Agreement - despite all 
differences and divergencies in other areas. Like other participants, to us, we wish to see this 
Agreement be implemented as Annex 4 under Marrakesh Agreement, which is doable with the 
consensus of the membership. We therefore urge all Members to consider supporting this request 
as we strongly believe that this Agreement will benefit all of us. The last t hing we want to see is that 
benefits cannot be materialized due to procedural issues.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 128 - 
 
  18.53.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
18.54.   The Russian Federation supports communication from Chile and Republic of Korea on behalf 
of IFD participants. Since 2017, this Agreement have made a long way from an idea to a full -fledged 
basic document on facilitating investment for the development. It is a great achievement in itself.  
IFD is a link between trade and investment. Right now, th is element is missing in the comprehensive 
WTO package.  
18.55.   Russia is pleased to note that the number of participants in the initiative is constantly 
growing. This is a very important and positive sign that this text is a valuable compromise and a 
fruitful coo peration outcome of the participants.  We are confident that its implementation will create 
open and clear conditions for attracting and stimulating foreign direct investment, which will benefit 
both developed and developing economies.  
18.56.   The Russian Federatio n encourages WTO members who think to join the document to 
consider such a possibility positively.  
18.57.   My Delegation supports the addition of the IFD to Annex 4 of the Marrakesh Agreement 
Establishing the WTO pursuant to paragraph 9 of Article X of this Agreem ent and we hope it would 
happen in Abu Dhabi.  
18.58.   The representative of Thailand  delivered the following statement:  
18.59.   Thailand would like to thank Chile for the report and also Korea for their co -coordinators' 
efforts and the update on the progress on the IFD in itiative. We also want to congratulate the IFD 
participants on their efforts in finalizing the IFD Agreement. We do see the value and share the views 
that the IFD Agreement will benefit all WTO Members, especially developing and LDC Members in 
attracting F DI through a transparent and predictable investment environment. We are in the process 
of looking at some legal aspects of the IFDA in capital.  
18.60.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
18.61.   Switzerland welcomes the conclusion of the  negotiations of the IFD Agreement by 117 WTO 
Members and hopefully growing. We commend the important work undertaken successfully by the 
co-coordinators, Chile and Korea.  Facilitation of investment is urgently needed to halt the global 
decline in investme nt that has been exacerbated by the Covid19 pandemic, and to implement the 
2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development.  
18.62.   This Agreement intends to strengthen foreign direct investment particularly in developing 
countries. It is aimed at a more inclusive growth based on international cooperation.  Therefore, we 
support that IFD Parties will engage with all WTO Members and will make in due course a request 
to integrate the agreement to Annex 4 of the Marrakesh Agreement.  
18.63.   Furthermore, we invite all members who have not done so to join this Agreement. It will 
provide benefits for all WTO members and foresees support for developing and LDC Members to 
implement the Agreement based on their respective needs.  
18.64.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
18.65.   First of all, I  would  like to join previous speakers to express my heartfelt appreciation to the 
co-coordinators for sharing the Information on Investment Facilitation for Development, for their 
concise but comprehensive report, as well as their commendabl e leadership in steering the IFD 
negotiations.  The significance of investment has been widely acknowledged. The G20 New Delhi 
Leaders' Declaration emphasized the importance of investment in promoting trade and economic 
growth, eliminating hunger, deliverin g quality education, implementing energy transition and 
enhancing women empowerment.  
18.66.   The G20 trade and investment ministerial meeting chaired by India also underlined the 
positive role of investment facilitation in promoting sustainable and inclusive glob al value chains, 
and supported deliberations at WTO on intersections between trade and investment. IFD was also 
discussed by G20 trade and investment Ministers . In the WTO, more and more members have shown WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 129 - 
 
  their support to the IFD. Currently 117 members ha ve joined the IFD. And more members are 
coming on broad. For the non -participants, some are favorably  considering it, pending domestic 
procedures, while others would not oppose adding the IFD Agreement into Annex 4 of the WTO 
Agreement. Through recent coll ective outreach efforts, it is clear that the vast majority of non -
participants can bless the IFD. Counting these Members, the IFD agreement is either participated or 
blessed by at least over 95  per cent  of WTO Members .  
18.67.   The broad support and engagement fr om a diverse range of the WTO members underscore 
the importance of IFD, in particular its role of attracting FDI to make up for the investment deficit 
faced by developing members. It could help the WTO meet the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals.  
Investmen t Facilitation for Development, as its name implies, is a development -oriented agreement, 
with four distinctive developmental dimensions . First, it is an agreement that was initiated and 
launched by a group of developing members and widely supported by mem bers from all regions and 
levels of development . Second, it is an agreement that developing members have made substantial 
contributions, with two -thirds of text -based proposals either came from, or were co -sponsored by, 
developing or LDC members . Third, it  is an agreement with a dedicated development chapter, 
embodying elements of S&DT, need assessment, technical assistance, and capacity building . Fourth, 
it is an agreement that is conducive to increase industrial production capacity and diversification and  
could provide for the exact kind of policy space and business environment that are needed by the 
developing countries for economic growth and transformation.  
18.68.   It is the common aspiration of all Members to make the WTO relevant to our times by 
reinvigorati ng its negotiating functions, in particular on issues of development. The IFD Agreement 
is the best example in this regard. As we are making every endeavor  to prepare the upcoming MC13 
outcome, it is worth recalling the spirit of good faith and cooperation  which had empowered members 
to achieve unprecedented success in the MC12. We are ready to engage and discuss further with all 
members including non -participating members, to support the inclusion of the IFD agreement into 
Annex 4 of the WTO Agreement at M C13. Together, let us deliver.  
18.69.   The representative of Costa Rica  delivered the following statement:  
18.70.   Costa Rica thanks Chile and the Republic of Korea for the joint communication submitted in 
their capacity as co -coordinators of the negotiations on investmen t facilitation for development. We 
commend them for their effective leadership and welcome the conclusion of these negotiations, 
which are so valuable for the promotion of foreign direct investment in developing and least 
developed countries.  
18.71.   Costa Rica has participated in this initiative with the firm conviction that trade policy and 
investment attraction policy are closely intertwined,  and that the implementation of investment 
facilitation measures will increase flows of foreign direct invest ment to developing and least 
developed countries, helping them to integrate their production into international markets and global 
value chains, and support the transfer of technology.  
18.72.   Accordingly, Costa Rica considers that the integration of the Investmen t Facilitation for 
Development Agreement into the WTO's legal architecture is a natural step, and we therefore call 
on Members to incorporate this Agreement into Annex 4 to the WTO Agreement as soon as possible.  
18.73.   The representative of the Philippines  delive red the following statement:  
18.74.   The Philippines thanks co -coordinators for the updates and for bringing us where we are 
today.  The objectives of the IFD were clear from the beginning – it increases transparency and 
facilitates procedures for investments. As F oreign Direct Investments greatly contribute to 
generating much needed jobs in my country, and as more Philippine businesses are exploring 
opportunities abroad, the future IFDA makes it easier for global investors to understand investment 
regulations and b ring business to those countries that need them.  
18.75.   More importantly, the IFDA is a development -focused agreement, as it offers a dedicated 
section on Special and Differential Treatment. It has a section on Sustainable Investments, 
encouraging responsible bu siness conduct. In addition, the WTO Secretariat, in cooperation with 
international organizations are conducting needs assessment exercises to ensure all participants can 
effectively implement the Agreement.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 130 - 
 
  18.76.   In closing, any initiative that can contribute to increased foreign direct investments into 
developing and least developed countries will certainly contribute to better, long -term investments, 
contributing to achieving our sustainable development goals. Like others, we also call for the 
incorporation o f the IFDA into the WTO legal architecture as an Annex 4 Agreement.  
18.77.   The representative of Ecuador  delivered the following statement:  
18.78.   We thank Chile and the Republic of Korea for adding this important item to today's agenda. 
My delegation has been part of t his initiative since 2019. Ecuador has participated actively in this 
process. Investment facilitation is a tool that complements and supports our national efforts to 
promote and attract investment, which is crucial to achieving the objectives of our Nation al 
Development Plan. Investment is a cross cutting issue that also covers trade. We have heard on 
many occasions across this Organization about the need to channel investments to improve 
international trade infrastructure, as well as other aspects of  a productive nature.  
18.79.   How do we intend to encourage fuller participation in international trade, especially for small 
and vulnerable economies, as well as for least developed countries? Without the necessary and 
appropriate investment to achieve this objective, international cooperation, technical assistance and 
capacity building, though substantial elements, have their limitations, in particular with respect to 
infrastructure. In this connection, Ecuador believes that investment facilitation is a catalyst for 
promoting economic growth and sustainable development. Once again, we thank Chile and the 
Republic of Korea for this item and the work carried out on this important issue.  
18.80.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
18.81.   We rightly  take a lot about the importance of this Organization in development. It is great 
to hear the reaction to the fabulous work being led by the brilliant co -facilitators. This is a significant 
new agreement, that we genuinely hope is going to turbo -charge sus tainable development, so as to 
equip developing and LDC Members to address the global pol ycrises.  
18.82.   As we all know, this IFD is the largest with 116 participants (over  two thirds of the 
Membership of this Organization.) The agreement shows for us that this Organization  can deliver for 
global trade, and for development, and we can address these current economic challenges.  
18.83.   Facilitating investment flows, is, as we all know, a key driver of economic growth, 
productivity and development. We think it is going to  provide significant economic benefits for 
Members, in particular for developing countries, by removing barriers to investment and reducing 
transaction costs.  
18.84.   It is predicted to increase global welfare by almost 2 per cent, boost cross -border investment 
– absolutely key to closing the US D 4 trillion funding gap in the SDGs so we look forward to the 
successful incorporation in the WTO in due course and to celebrating this achievement at MC13, 
where Members from over two thirds of the Organization  will join together to mark our shared 
ambition of driving sustainable global development.  
18.85.   The representative of New Zealand  delivered the following statement:  
18.86.   New Zealand thanks Chile and Korea for updating the membership on the significant 
progress made on the IFD negotiation. Bringing the IFD disciplines into effect will be an important 
demonstration of WTO support for developing and LDC Members. We encourage all Members to 
engage on the text and facilitate comp letion of the remaining steps needed , for the IFD to enter into 
force in due course.  
18.87.   The representative of Kyrgyz Republic  delivered the following statement:  
18.88.   The Kyrgyz Republic supports the communication by Chile and the Republic of Korea and 
expresses s pecial thanks to co -coordinators and the participating 117 members for the tremendous 
efforts and demonstrated strong will and flexibility on the way to promote the text of the agreement 
within the work of the Joint Initiative to attain our joint goal to i mprove the investment and business 
climate, making it easier for investors to invest, as well as to facilitate their day -to-day business and 
expand their operations.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 131 - 
 
  18.89.   We tie our much hope with the implementation of the IFD agreement in the near future. We 
all expect that, once it comes into force, the IFD agreement will efficiently promote the 
implementation of investment facilitation measures in the form of transparency, administration 
streamlining, international cooperation, and other types of efforts to facilitate the flow and increase 
of foreign direct investments among members.  
18.90.   These investment facilitation measures will be useful for creating a more investment - and 
business -friendly environment, one which facilitates the entry and operation of foreign  direct 
investment (FDI) across the WTO Members . There is also a high expectation from us that these 
disciplines will be especially useful for small and developing economies like the Kyrgyz Republic in 
our efforts to attract foreign investment and will fin ally result in our increased participation in global 
investment flows and hence deeper integration in the global supply chain.  
18.91.   On this regard, given the importance of the agreement, we also note that the IFD Agreement 
would be a valuable addition to the WT O rules package  after MC13, and thus, we would like to urge 
all WTO Members to support the given communication.  
18.92.   The representative of Dominican Republic  delivered the following statement:  
18.93.   After six years of intensive and productive work, we now have a con sensus text of the 
Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement. The Agreement is a valuable tool, with the 
potential to facilitate foreign investment flows between countries. The support from the WTO 
Secretariat and the harmonious work of Ambassador Boza of Chile and Ambassador Park of Korea 
are exemplary and have paved the way for endorsement by 117 WTO Members. The Agreement will 
make it possible to implement innovative provisions, improving the levels of transparency and 
predictability of measures,  streamlining and speeding up procedures to facilitate investment, and 
enhancing cross -border cooperation, information sharing and the adoption of best practices. It also 
includes the promotion of sustainable development  as a means to encourage the uptake by investors 
and enterprises of responsible practices. Special and differential treatment is an essential element 
of the Agreement, including technical assistance and support for capacity building. Foreign 
investment is an important factor for economic and  social development, contributing to poverty 
reduction, job creation, technology transfer, as well as the expansion and diversification of 
productive capacity and trade.  For that reason, we are excited about the expected benefits of the 
Agreement, especial ly for developing and least developed countries.  
18.94.   Lastly, the Dominican Republic reaffirms its support for the original vision of this initiative, 
namely, to create a favorable environment to facilitate foreign investment, and supports the 
co-coordinators' proposal to request the incorporation of Agreement into the WTO legal architecture.  
18.95.   The representative of Myanmar  delivered the following statement:  
18.96.   Thanks  to the  delegation of Chile and the Republic of Korea for submitting this 
communication and the part icipating members for their tireless efforts. We supported the Joint 
Ministerial Statement on IFD since the launch of it at 11th Ministerial Conference 2017 in Buenos 
Aires as it is important initiative and continuously support this initiative.  We believe IFD facilitates 
greater developing and least -developed members' participation in global investment flows which 
constitutes a core objective of the IFD Agreement.  
18.97.   We share with other IFD participants  that in order for the IFD Agreement to produce its 
pro-development benefits, it is necessary to add the IFD Agreement to the WTO legal architecture.  
We urge all Members to join the Agreement and hope with the support of all WTO Members  that the 
Agreement will be one of the MC13 outcomes.  
18.98.   The representative of the Lao People's Democratic Republic  delivered the following 
statement:  
18.99.   We thank Chile and Korea for co -coordinating  the IFD. For Lao PDR, it is of great importance 
to facilitate IFD and we expect that the future IFD Agreement could further facilitate sustainable IFD 
flows that allow us to derive more benefit s from investment and increase the development impact , 
including through job creati on, security development knowledge transfer, technology  transfer and 
economic  diversification. Joining the IFD within the WTO framework allows for a more integrated WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 132 - 
 
  approach to international trade and investment. It provides a platform for addressing both,  trade 
and investment issues.  
18.100.   Simultaneously , the IFDA  within the WTO Agreements can help in setting global standard 
for investment policy. It can contribute to more consistent and predictable investment environment 
which is attractive to investors. It is  important that the agreement ensures that the unique needs 
and challenges of developing countries and LDC are address ed properly in particular the needs to 
provide for support for tech nical assistance  and capacity building. In conclusion , let me emphasize  
that it is very important that WTO Members commit themselves to establishing sufficiently large 
technical assistance and capacity -building programs to assist developing and LDC s in the 
implementation . The outcome of the negotiation s is a key to put develo ping countries , and especially 
LDCs, in a position to benefit as much as possible from the IFD A. 
18.101.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
18.102.   The European Union welcomes the conclusion of the negotiations on an agreement on 
investment facilitation for development. This comes at a crucial moment, when the gap in foreign 
direct investment to address sustainable development goals has never been so broad. According to 
Unctad USD  4 trillion per year.  
18.103.   The implementation of the agre ement could contribute to increase the flows of foreign 
direct investment towards developing countries by encouraging transparency, streamlining 
investment procedures and improving the relationship between investors and the administration. 
This is in line with what most developing countries are trying to do at domestic level.  
18.104.   The European Union stands ready to support the future implementation process, just as we 
are already supporting today several pilot projects by developing countries to carry out their needs 
assessment in relation to the agreement.  The European Union hopes that consensus can be found 
in order to allow this agreement to quickly deliver on the expected benefits.  
18.105.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
18.106.   The IFDA promot es the flow of investment among WTO Members, especially to developing 
countries, and promote sustainable development, and are also recognized as a meaningful 
agreement for developing country Members. In fact, more than 80 developing country Members 
have pa rticipated in the negotiations for this Agreement. Japan supports the early incorporation of 
this Agreement into the WTO Agreement and appreciates Chile and Korea for their coordinating 
roles.  
18.107.   The representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia  delivered the  following statement:  
18.108.   The Kingdom of Saudi Arabia congratulates Members that participated in the negotiations 
of this important agreement for concluding the negotiations and joins the strong believe on the 
importance of this agreement to increasing economi c growth, attracting direct foreign investment, 
and enhancing sustainable development. Most importantly, this agreement is a set of transparent, 
efficient and predictive rules on investment facilitation while focusing on all development aspects. 
The Kingdo m of Saudi Arabia is fully engaged to continue working constructively with Members to 
integrate this agreement into the WTO legal architecture.  
18.109.   The representative of Guatemala  delivered the following statement:  
18.110.   We would like to thank the co -coordinators f or their report on the progress made in the 
negotiation of the Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement. We would like to congratulate 
the countries that have been part of this negotiation for the conclusion of the Agreement.  
18.111.   For Guatemala, this A greement is of great importance given that it seeks to increase the 
transparency and predictability of investment measures, in particular by providing special and 
differential treatment, technical assistance and capacity building for developing countries a nd LDCs.  
We would like to support what the co -coordinators have indicated, in that our next step is to 
incorporate the IFD Agreement into Annex 4 of the WTO, so we invite members to come forward in 
case they would like more information on this agreement an d support our proposal.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 133 - 
 
  18.112.   The representative of India delivered the following statement18: 
18.113.   I will try to be brief, as we have a very long statement. So, I will share it with the Secretariat 
for the consumption of every Member. India would like to thank the coordinators  for submitting this 
proposal and if you recall day before yesterday, there wa s a specific clarification or question from 
India, whether this proposal is coming for information. It was said that yes, it is coming for 
information and chair you also said that your view is also that it is for information. I thank all the 
respondents or  the proponents who have spoken on this topic. I would like to take some of us back 
in memory and I am sure those who were here in 2017, during the May General Council meeting 
may be aware of the historical facts of this subject. There are four things to r ecall.  
18.114.   One is what we call July 2004 framework. This I would like to place on record as part of 
our statement. The document number WT/L/579  of 2 August 2004, which is covering that July 
framework and that is the July 2004 GC decision which  actually give a negati ve mandate - negative 
forget non -mandated, it gave a negative mandate to this topic. Then we come to Nairobi Ministerial 
which was not in WTO context, not very distant. It was in 2015, eight years back. The para graph  34 
of Nairobi Ministerial declaration - I would again like to put that on record as part of my statement. 
I will not repeat those paragraphs or those documents. Para graph  34 of Nairobi Ministerial 
declaration again continued the negative mandate. I am not saying non -mandated issues but 
negative  mandate of Ministers not to have negotiation s on this subject.  
18.115.   Then, of course we had in 2017 the GC deliberation over two days, 10 and 18 May 2017. 
The minutes are available in WT/GC/M/167 , which is dated 21 July 2017. So, this is the third 
document whi ch I would like to place on record as part of my statement, giving the background of 
this topic and the last document which, I would like to quote is the document presented by Namibia, 
South Africa and India, which is WT/GC/W/819/Rev.1  that is the legal status of JSIs. I will not get 
into the substance of this agreement, and I will only talk about the process. As per the provisions of 
Article III.2 and Article X of the Marrakesh Agreement, any new disciplines, needing discussions 
require agreeme nts of all WTO Members.  
18.116.   Second, in 2017 General Council meeting, India had objection to the adoption of the 
agenda, citing reservations about the procedural part of General Council functioning. In that 
response, if we read the minutes of that meeting, som e of the proponents who have spoken today, 
several countries stated that informal dialogue is only aimed at information sharing instead of 
negotiation. Further, India was asked to allow the agenda that it was not a proposal to start any 
negotiations. They were taking this opportunity to inform other Members of an informal process they 
wanted to initiate .  
18.117.   The Chairperson  reminded the delegation of India of the suggested time -limits for 
interventions.  
18.118.   The representative of India made the following statement:  
18.119.   There are around 50 speakers and I have a systemic issue  on this. So, I will seek your 
indulgence to allow me some more time. If I cannot make my statement, it will deprive Members of 
not having the view of one Member which i s not willing to agree to this. I will deposit my statement  
and request that it is made available to Members.19 
18.120.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
18.121.   I will be brief. I was not planning on intervening on this, but I must. As you all know the 
United States is not a participant of this initiative, but we welcome the initiative and we have said 
that before. I will say that, listening here, particularly to many Members with who are participating 
in this, who we really hear from, it is really heartening, and it goes to why we are here. While, again, 
we are not part of it, we welcome that it has been concluded, the intention of putting it in an Annex  4, 
 
18 Following the meeting, the delegation of India subm itted subsequently their oral and written statements 
to the Secretariat for inclusion in the record. India's written statements have been included in the Annex, as 
requested.  
19 In this regard, reference is made to  WT/GC/262 , which was circulated on 21 December  2024 at the 
request of India.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 134 - 
 
  as I h ave said this before, we have no objection to that, even though we are not participating. Since 
we do not have much time, obviously this is a conversation that needs to continue.  
18.122.   We disagree with the paper that was put on the table some time ago by South Africa, India 
and Namibia, on their interpretation of the JSI's and whether they are consistent or not with the 
WTO Agreement; we do believe that the WTO system does provide for and can sustain plurilateral 
initiatives. This is how we can make progress. I said here yesterday, we had a conversation about 
technology transfer, this is part of that conversation, having a healthy and transparent regulatory 
system, whether it is for investment of otherwise is part of what creates the enabling ecosystem for 
volunt ary technology transfer. So again, we welcome that from that perspective and if you believe 
that we need to have conversations about that topic, then we do certainly think that investment 
facilitation and transparency, which is what this is about, belongs in the system. I just wanted to 
add those thoughts, I did not have anything prepared but wanted to be clear on that.  
18.123.   The representative of India delivered the following statement:  
18.124.   Sorry to come back  only 10 seconds . To sum up, we do not  think that this do cument 
referred to in the communication is a legal document . Therefore , we would not like it to be placed 
before Ministers for decision.  
18.125.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement:  
18.126.   Korea, along with Chile, thanks about 3 2 Members who made interventions today. It was 
not very often, but a pleasant occasion to confirm broad common views among developing and 
developed members. Now it is a tough job for the co -coordinators to keep the count of participants 
updated. The count was 116 when this communication was submitted. Now, it stands at 117, with 
Armenia having joined two days ago and today a few members announced they are close to joining.  
18.127.   But we are not complacent yet. It is clear, from what we heard today, that we need t o 
communicate further with non -participants to garner the consensus required for the legal 
incorporation of the IFD Agreement. I believe that information sharing today in this General Council 
marked a very good start.  
18.128.   All participants, both developing and  developed members, have put in years of tireless 
efforts to create a high -quality product in the form of the IFD Agreement. I am especially proud that 
the negotiating process has been – from start to finish – open and transparent while never losing 
sight of our shared development goals. Now, we turn to the task of bringing the benefits of this high -
quality product to all members and the global economy. We look forward to engaging with each one 
of you who may have questions, advice, or frank concerns, with the goal of achieving a rare and 
significant milestone in Abu Dhabi. A flower is growing in a dry land.  
18.129.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
18.130.   I think as Members of this Organization, in this room, we should think about how to work 
for the people. Actually, we do  not lack mandates . We have a lot of mandates  but w hat we do lack 
are deliverables. When the deliverable is already on the table, it can benefit Members, especially the 
developing Members and LDCs. We should do it. I will sto p here.  
18.131.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
19  ENHANCING MULTILATERAL DELIBERATIVE FUNCTION ON ENVIRONMENT -RELATED 
TRADE MEASURES AND FOSTERING SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT - REQUEST FROM CHINA 
AND COLOMBIA  
19.1.   The Chairperson  invited China or Colombia to introduce the agenda item  "Enhancing 
Multilateral Deliberative Function on Environment -Related Trade Measures and Fostering Sustainable 
Development".  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 135 - 
 
  19.2.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
19.3.   Under this item, I will deliv er an overall statement representing both China and Colombia. 
Following that, Colombia will provide a supplementary statement addressing the intersection of 
international trade and environmental laws. The link between trade and environment is vitally 
recog nized.  Trade policies are increasingly being used as a policy tool for environmental purposes.  
19.4.   Environmental policies on the other hand affect more and more trade flows. The WTO could 
and should play a more prominent role in ensuring the mutual supportiven ess of trade regimes and 
environment regimes and in deliberating concrete multilateral trade solutions to respond to global 
environmental challenges and foster sustainable development. In this regard, we are greatly 
encouraged by the revitalized discussion s in the Committee on Trade and Environment pursuant to 
MC12 mandate. A large number of proposals were submitted, transparency and experience sharing 
exercises were carried out and a first thematic session on trade and energy transition was held on 
the ref orm by doing basis.  
19.5.   Meanwhile, many Members' have voiced their concerns on unilateral and actual territorial 
environmental measures affecting trade, which may act against the multilateral cooperation and 
have significant trade impacts for Members, especial  developing Members.  
19.6.   Against this background, more and more Members have advocated for enhancing the 
deliberative function of the WTO to respond to global environmental challenges. That is why China 
and Colombia requested to have this item on this GC agenda, we believe MC13 offers a valuable 
opportunity for such purposes and invite s Members to consider the following ideas for potential 
MC13  outcomes.  
19.7.   First, a strong political commitment to multilateral cooperative approaches to address global 
environmental  challenges, including reiterating the principles among others that "measures taken 
to combat climate change, including unilateral ones, should not constitute a means of arbitrary or 
unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade". Second, setting up a 
multilateral mechanism such as a standing Agenda item in CTE for enhancing multilateral 
deliberative functions on environment -related trade measures and environmental measures 
affecting trade. Such agenda could include the foll owing elements: (i) enhance the transparency and 
deliberation of environment -related trade measures and environmental measures affecting trade 
through structured and informative dialogue among Members, to allow meaningful exchange of 
views on policy design s, attend to the environmental affects and potential market access impact, 
particularly on developing countries. (ii) examine the interplay between international trade and 
environmental laws, to ensure a coherent, mutually supportive and harmonious rapport  between 
international trade and environmental policies. (iii) identify policy instruments within the mandate 
of the WTO that can support members' efforts on combating environmental challenges and achieving 
the Sustainable Development Goals, including for example trade liberalization and facilitation for the 
deployment of environmental goods and services, advancement for facilitation to foster green supply 
chains and green trade, technology transfer and diffusion to accelerate energy transition or other 
relevant policy tools with a special focus on development dimensions.  
19.8.   These elements are by no means exhaustive, we encourage all members to offer their ideas 
to enhancing the deliberative function of WTO for sustainable development purposes. The global 
environmental challenges are real which require real actions from trade outside as the WTO. Let us  
commit ourselves to moving from vision to reality from MC13.  
19.9.   The representative of Colombia  delivered the following statement:  
19.10.   Colombia supports the comments mad e by China under this agenda item and aligns itself 
with China's statement. We would also like to add the following . Multilateral environmental fora are 
probably the most important fora in the world at this time. The three fundamental environmental 
convent ions, in addition to their respective conferences of the parties (COP) and the agreements 
resulting from them, are the keys to a common and shared future.  Within these forums, they assess 
the situation and the main causes of environmental problems, priorit ize some activities over others 
and negotiate the balances and the ways in which the  main objectives should be met.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 136 - 
 
  19.11.   We see relatively little of this at the WTO. We focus on our usual tools with a certain 
disconnection from the overall picture. We discuss e xisting trade measures that have an impact on 
the environment, but often overlook the fact that there are other measures that are deemed to be 
much more important and that there are different, negotiated ways of doing things.  It does not 
necessarily have t o be this way. Here at the WTO, we could start by carrying out joint and periodic 
reviews of the findings made,  and agreements reached at the environmental COPs.  
19.12.   This is a necessity, including from a legal standpoint. The rules of public trade law cannot b e 
considered in "clinical isolation" from the rules of public environmental law, as was stressed by the 
Appellate Body in US — Gasoline. This means that WTO rules must be interpreted in a manner that 
is consistent and in harmony with other areas of law and , first and foremost, with international 
environmental law. The conclusions reached within the environmental forums, the priorities agreed, 
the fundamental principles governing both spheres and the negotiated ways of doing things cannot 
be ignored, as they  are an integral part of our rule book.  
19.13.   Within the WTO, we have entered into a somewhat controversial and complex discussion on 
the principle of common but differentiated responsibilities, which has generated significant 
opposition. However, we are of the view that this point is just one aspect of a much bigger picture. 
We should enhance our discussions by using all of the principles, findings, conclusions, priorities and 
agreements established within the environmental forums. Perhaps we are the ones who should adapt 
to them, rather than applying  unilateral trade measures that fail to take adequate account of what 
has been achieved in these forums' negotiations.  
19.14.   In addition, despite the major difficulties, the discussions within environmental forums are 
conducted in a much more cooperative way that recognizes important nuances. I will give some 
examples, all of which are taken from statements made by large delegations. In environmental 
forums, they recognize that the subsidization of certain activities has significant adverse 
environmental effects, whereas, here, in the main forum for discussing subsidies, we prefer to refrain 
from talking seriously about limiting them. In environmental forums, they recognize that energy 
goals must take into account energy poverty, whereas, here, we ignore arguments about poverty 
and opt instead for unilateral trade measures that have a particular impact on the most vulnerable. 
In environmental forums, they say that we need to grant more support to the developing world, 
including technology and tec hnology transfer, whereas, here, we say that it is not something to be 
spoken about. In environmental forums, they work on the basic premise that we should set 
environmental goals and see how each country can contribute based on its capacity, whereas, here , 
we discuss one -size-fits-all measures that are imposed from above. In environmental forums, they 
recognize that developed countries need to move faster, whereas, here, we deny the existence of 
certain principles and of common but differentiated responsib ilities in particular.  
19.15.   It is not, therefore, just a legal or logical necessity. We truly need to familiarize ourselves 
with the environmental forums, to improve our discussions with them and to learn from their 
positions. The WTO has made some important, a lbeit tentative, progress in this regard. The Trade 
Day at COP28, supported by the Director -General and the Secretariat, is good news. The 
revitalization of the Committee on Trade and Environment, under the leadership of Ecuador, is good 
news. The discussi ons and documents on environmental principles, including the forum promoted 
by Colombia during the Public Forum, are good news. While the study proposed by the Chief 
Economist on carbon pricing based on environmental principles appeared to be good news, we  are 
yet to see this study despite the fact that it was announced more than nine months ago.  
19.16.   These pathways for improved discussions between both spheres need to be strengthened 
and, above all, maintained. The WTO cannot deny or ignore what is happening i n the most important 
multilateral forums of our time. The WTO cannot and should not be a silo and should strive to remain 
in step with the progress that our own countries are making in multilateral environmental forums.  
We apologize for the fact that we h ave not submitted documents at this stage. It is partly because 
we wanted to hear about and highlight the progress and most significant interventions made at the 
recent COP28, which ended just a couple of days ago, precisely as part of this deliberative ex ercise 
among forums that we are proposing.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 137 - 
 
  19.17.   The representative of Brazil  delivered the following statement:  
19.18.   My delegation thanks China and Colombia for requesting the agenda item.  Brazil echoes and 
supports China's statement.  We would also like to acknowled ge the collaborative ongoing work with 
a number of developing countries on the current and future work of the CTE;  It is our understanding 
that the CTE should promote multilateral and collaborative strategies that ensure trade and 
environmental policies ar e mutually supportive and effectively contribute to the overarching 
objective of sustainable development;  Among other things, we believe the CTE should: (i) examine 
the interplay between trade and environmental laws, focusing on their concepts, principles and 
responsibilities, to ensure a balanced and harmonious rapport between multilateral regimes in the 
pursuit of sustainable development; (ii) enhance the transparency and monitoring of trade measures 
used for environmental purposes and of environmental me asures which have significant trade 
effects, through a meaningful dialogue among Members on their fundamentals and their consistency 
with relevant trade and environmental concepts, principles, and responsibilities.  We will continue to 
work closely with oth er delegations in this area, including with a view to possible outcomes at MC13.  
19.19.   The representative of Türkiye  delivered the following statement:  
19.20.   We thank China and Colombia for bringing this item to the agenda.  As combatting climate 
change and mitigating its impacts is a global challenge, multilateralism and cooperation is absolutely 
necessary. The significance of the multilateral trading system in responding to these challenges has 
been also emphasized by our Ministers at MC12.  
19.21.   Increasing recourse to tra de related climate and environment measures also made in depth 
multilateral discussions on these matters urgent, in order to limit their negative trade effects, to 
ensure that they do not constitute arbitrary or disguised restrictions or unjustifiable disc rimination 
in international trade, while ensuring their compliance with both international trade and environment 
law. Considering that countries carry out different climate policies within the context of their own 
national conditions and development levels , we believe that a holistic perspective and a transparent 
basis should be created in which heterogeneous climate policies can be compared and eventually 
aligned, also taking into account needs of sustainable development.  
19.22.   Within this framework, we apprecia te the work done for the reinvigoration of the WTO 
Committee on Trade and Environment and note the significant amount of work undertaken in that 
fora. The work of the CTE is very significant in terms of ensuring inclusivity in this new area of 
measures, no t only by encouraging transparency but also by its potential to serve as a forum where 
the important principle of international cooperation in the fight against climate change can be 
materialized.  
19.23.   We would like to indicate that we support deeper discussio ns on the nexus of trade and 
environment at the WTO, be it through informal sessions or dedicated discussions, and we are ready 
to constructively engage with other members.  
19.24.   The representative of Egypt  delivered the following statement:  
19.25.   We thank China and C olombia for putting this item on the agenda and we share many of the 
elements mentioned.  We advocate for the initiation of multilateral discussions, within the framework 
of the CTE mandate, concerning environment -related trade measures and their implicatio ns for 
market access especially on developing and least developed countries. These discussions should 
prioritize supporting developing countries and LDCs through capacity building, financial assistance, 
and proper technology transfer programs and initiativ es. The objective should be to mitigate the 
adverse effects, particularly those stemming from unilateral measures, on their market shares and 
promote sustainable development and multilateral solutions. MC13 presents an opportune moment 
to launch such a dis cussion.  
19.26.   We reiterate our position that the environment -related trade measures should be consistent 
with WTO rules and have no harmful effects on other countries, especially developing countries and 
LDCs. These measures should be transparent and should tak e into consideration the diverse level of 
development of member states and capacity constraints of developing countries and LDCs. These 
measures should avoid creating unnecessary or disguised barriers to trade flows and market access, WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 138 - 
 
  especially for develo ping countries, to help them increase their share in international trade, as 
recognized in para s. 1 and 2 of the Marrakesh agreement.  
19.27.   Furthermore, we believe that MC13 should establish discussion on the relationship between 
trade, environment and developme nt and how to ensure coherence and complementarity between 
WTO work and negotiations under UNFCCC and other multilateral environmental agreements. The 
conference should also give a mandate to discuss the set of guidelines and principles that should 
guide t he relationship between trade and environment in WTO and how to ensure that the 
environment -related trade measures are in line with longstanding environmental rules and 
principles, especially the principles of equity and CBDR.  
19.28.   The representative of Indones ia delivered the following statement:  
19.29.   We share the view on the important link between trade and sustainable development.  In this 
regard, while trade and environmental measures can go hand -in- hand and provide solutions to 
environmental challenges – we cont inue to hold the view that these measures must be implemented 
in a manner that is consistent with the WTO principles.  More importantly, they should not be used 
as disguised trade barriers that are discriminatory in nature.  
19.30.   As such, we see merits in the pro posal to have further discussion on this environment -related 
trade measures in CTE.  Such discussion should focus among others on assessing the impacts of such 
measures toward the market access for developing countries; and identifying how WTO can provide 
concrete support for Members in achieving the SDGs – taking into account their different needs, 
concerns, and levels of development.  We look forward to contributing constructively to this initiative.  
19.31.   The representative of Paraguay  delivered the following st atement:  
19.32.   In Paraguay, we are convinced that international trade can and should make a positive 
contribution to achieving environmental goals, including climate change adaptation and mitigation. 
We are also convinced that a rules -based, open, transparent, f airer and non -discriminatory 
multilateral trading system, with the WTO at its center , is the means to achieve this.  
19.33.   In this connection, we believe that way in which the WTO can contribute to the economic, 
social and environmental dimensions of sustainable development is by strengthening and deepening 
its rules, as opposed to the exceptions or fragmentation created by unilateral, trade -related 
environmental measures adopted by some WTO  Members.  
19.34.   Discussions on this matter are not yet at a sufficiently advance d stage, and it should continue 
to be deliberated in the Committee on Trade and Environment, which is the standing forum dedicated 
to dialogue among Members on the relationship between trade measures and environmental 
measures, where these issues are alrea dy under discussion.  
19.35.   Chair, Members' positions on this issue are highly polarized. The slow but steady work in the 
CTE and  other initiatives is helping to build trust and find common ground on which to move the 
discussion forwards. Initiatives that are not  Member -led, even if clearly identified as such, do not 
lead to results and undermine the trust -building process, and should be avoided.  
19.36.   The representative of the Russian Federation  delivered the following statement:  
19.37.   Preliminarily Russia supports the idea tabled by China and Colombia on this matter. А trend 
to introduce unilateral trade restrictive measures under the pretext of addressing environmental 
challenges worries the majority of the Membership, as we just witnessed this morning under one of 
the prev ious items  of the agenda.  
19.38.   We are convinced however that the workstream proposed by China and Colombia should not 
affect Members' compliance with transparency obligations under the WTO Agreements, including 
those related to TBT, SPS, Import licensing and Q uantitative restrictions. On top of that, the issue 
in our view should be explored from the angle of influence on the entire Multilateral Trading System, 
including the effects on global supply chains and world economy in a whole.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 139 - 
 
  19.39.   The representative of the Philippines  delivered the following statement:  
19.40.   The Philippines would like to thank China and Colombia for raising this issue at this crucial 
juncture, right after COP28 has successfully concluded in Dubai with the Global Stock take  and key 
outcomes on the loss and damage fund, commitments to triple renewable energy capacity and 
double energy efficiency improvements, the phase out of inefficient fossil fuel subsidies and 
ambitious language on just energy transitions towards net zero by 2050.  
19.41.   The Philippines concurs with those that have spoken about the need for the WTO to be more 
ambitious in focusing on how trade policy instruments can support environmental sustainability. We 
welcome efforts to revitalize the CTE but also see the need to appl y a sustainability lens across the 
organization, in technical work of Committees and in enhanced cross -Committee collaboration. The 
Philippines holds that the WTO would stand to benefit from pursuing greater complementarity with 
other multilateral processe s and MEAs. In this respect, the Global Stock take  calls on members to 
promote "a supportive and open international economic system…noting that measures taken to 
combat climate change, including unilateral ones, should not constitute a means of arbitrary o r 
unjustifiable discrimination or a disguised restriction on international trade." We stand to benefit in 
examining how the WTO can positively contribute to our collective environmental goals and call for 
a commensurate level of ambition at MC13 that was s hown at COP28.  
19.42.   The representative of South Africa  delivered the following statement:  
19.43.   South Africa would like to welcome the statement by China and also stress that there should 
be continuing discussions at the CTE. I would like to add that the trend of int roducing new subsidies 
linked to environmental goals is deeply concerning, especially as these are on zero -sum basis. We 
have got to avoid another race to the bottom in the name of sustainability. We should take great 
care not to give sustainability a bad name. However, we do need to sustain goodwill and international 
cooperation and promoting green growth, whilst staying faithful to trade rules and safeguarding the 
interests of developing countries.  
19.44.   It is also important that when we enter discussions in th is area we do so honestly and in a 
fact-based manner to understand the systemic implications of some of the proposed measures and 
the effects they could potentially have on developing countries. We must stress the point that we 
should not break internation al cooperation in this sensitive area. Sustainability measures must be 
undertaken thoughtfully to consider the effects of other countries, especially developing countries.  
19.45.   The representative of Pakistan  delivered the following statement:  
19.46.   Trade related pol icies and measure are increasingly being used as a tool to implement 
environmental objectives, which have unsurprisingly, given rise to controversies and concern to 
many of the members especially developing and least developed countries.  
19.47.   We acknowledge th e fact that trade in environmental goods has the potential to transform 
the global economy into an engine for sustainable global development, but the fact of the matter is 
that most of the developing countries and LDCs lack financial space resulting in var ious constraints 
such as limited access to affordable green technology, infrastructure and technical capacity.  
19.48.   We have always maintained that there should be balanced approach to integrate 
environmental objectives into trade measures by ensuring that they  adhere to WTO principles, avoid 
protectionism, and do not create unjustified barriers to international trade. We believe that CTE can 
play a vital role in ensuring that this balanced approach can be reached multi -laterally.  
19.49.   The representative of India delivered the following statement20: 
19.50.   Thank you, Chair and if I may say, you need not be defensive about whatever you are doing 
because as GC Chair , we always feel that you are representing the collective responsibility of all our 
 
20 Following the meeting, the delegation of India submitted subsequently their oral and written statements 
to the Secretariat for inclusion in the record. India's written statements have been included in the Annex, as 
requeste d. WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 140 - 
 
  Members, and you are free to  do anything what you wish is in the collective interest of all the 
Members. On this agenda, I will not take time and I will submit my written statement.  
19.51.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
19.52.   The E uropean Union would l ike to thank Colombia and India for their presentations.  The 
European Union proposals for WTO reform include as one of the objectives enhanced deliberations  
on global environmental challenges.  
19.53.   The European Union views the WTO, especially the CTE, as a val uable forum for actively 
engaging on trade -related environmental measures, both during the design phase and once the 
measures are in force. Rather than negotiating structures for dialogue, we have walked the talk by 
engaging with members during the design of our policies and have continued this active involvement 
as we move towards implementation.  
19.54.   We do not consider prescriptive rules for engagement in the WTO on trade related climate 
measures necessary. Nor do we believe they would entice WTO Members to en gage more than they 
have done; quite the opposite, indeed, they might discourage engagement.  
19.55.   When it comes to interpreting WTO law and environmental law and principles, the CTE does 
not have a mandate to interpret the WTO legal regime, even less so enviro nmental ones. We must 
be very careful about what we wish for. No Member would like that bodies established under 
international environmental agreements start interpreting WTO law.  
19.56.   If we genuinely want to encourage or engage in deliberation and identify way s in which trade 
policy can contribute to addressing global environmental challenges, we encourage members to shift 
from ideological discussions and engage in practical action.  One such action could be to explore how 
we can facilitate trade, provide suppor t, and offer technical assistance to enhance Developing 
Countries' abilities to export.  
19.57.   The representative of Singapore  delivered the following statement:  
19.58.   I would like to thank China and Colombia for this agenda item and for sharing some 
suggestions on enh ancing the deliberative function of the WTO on trade and environmental 
sustainability. First, we should work towards delivering a meaningful outcome on trade and 
environmental sustainability at MC13. This will send a strong signal of the WTO's relevance in  
addressing pressing and existential global challenges like climate change.  
19.59.   Second, we agree that MC13 would be a valuable opportunity to demonstrate political 
commitment to address environment -related trade measures at the WTO. This will complement and 
add value deliberations on trade and environmental sustainability at the WTO.  
19.60.   Third, we should avoid being overly prescriptive or introducing controversial elements that 
could impose additional obligations on Members.  
19.61.   The representative of Norway  delivere d the following statement:  
19.62.   Norway would like to thank China and Colombia for their engagement on enhancing the 
multilateral deliberative function on environment -related trade measures and fostering sustainable 
development. Two comments: We support a strong  political commitment to multilateral cooperative 
approaches coming out of MC13 and strengthening further the role of the CTE in this regard. A 
deliberative discussion in the CTE must take into regard also the need for environmental measures 
and the right to regulate. Ambitious multilateral action would reduce the need for unilateral 
measures.  
19.63.   In Norway's view, our work on trade and environment will benefit from being focused on 
concrete actions and measures. Although the respective legal regimes of trade a nd environment 
must be seen in conjunction, we should be careful not to "import " principles and concepts from one 
regime to the other, since they have been developed in distinct political contexts. We should avoid 
increasing the level of polarization.  Before closing, let me just add that it would have been helpful 
for the discussion if there had been a document circulated before the meeting.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 141 - 
 
  19.64.   The representative of Switzerland  delivered the following statement:  
19.65.   We thank China and Colombia for their interventi ons. As we all know, the whole planet is 
facing climate change, pollution and biodiversity loss and some Members may face bigger 
consequences. These issues require international collaboration and an approach that includes all 
policy fields, including trade . In other words, trade has to contribute to the solution,  and we believe 
that these global issues need a global answer, which means all hands -on deck.  We support enhancing 
the deliberative function on trade and environmental sustainability issues at the C TE. 
19.66.   However, in principle, we believe that some of the concepts that are put forward by China 
and Colombia have not been agreed on in other international fora and remain controversial. We 
would therefore be cautious when using the term "guiding principles" . Importing political polarization 
from other fora would not help our discussions in the WTO.  
19.67.   In our view a discussion on the implications of a controversial and sometimes misunderstood 
principle in the WTO will not lead us any further, and we are here to discuss concrete topics in the 
environment -trade nexus and how the WTO can play a meaningful role in addressing environmental 
challenges.  
19.68.   We should rather focus on the fundamental question, which is how trade can contribute to 
mitigation of and adaptation to climate change and how trade related measures can address climate 
change – including how S&DT provisions can be utilized. S&DT is a clearly defined concept at the 
WTO.  
19.69.   We encourage Members to focus discussions on concrete actions rather than having 
discussions on principles, that might not lead us any further.  
19.70.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
19.71.   2023 is set to be the hottest year on record, dangerously nearing the 1.5 -degree threshold. 
As our Ministers r eturn from the UAE, we are pleased to see the first Trade and Finance Day at COP. 
We should feel the collective push behind us to make real progress here in this Organization . While 
we work the work that the DG and Secretariat have done, if I may, just encourage a little more 
engagement and transparency with Members in advance so that we can really help and contribute 
to that work.  
19.72.   The CTE and its recent reinvigoration is a k ey part of working here on what Members can do 
to tackle the climate crisis, alongside other environmental challenges.  
19.73.   We welcome the process and thank the CTE Chair to really drive this forward.  
19.74.   In June, the UK tabled its own paper on how to revitalize  the deliberative functions of the 
CTE, and make sure it works for all Members, in line with our wider reform efforts. This included 
practical steps to improve the efficiency and inclusivity of our work.  
19.75.   We started we thematic sessions and it is great to see  that these are now underway. It is 
the UK's view that the discussion at the CTE work better when they are thematic to preserve the 
CTE's valuable function as a forum for dialogue and exchange, rather than litigation.  
19.76.   They should aim to foster a more rigo rous analysis of emerging policies and evidence. 
Members, with stakeholders' support, can and should take time to explore what good policy design 
could look like. We also wish to emphasis the bottom -up, pragmatic work on trade policy solutions. 
This is the  key added value of the CTE and we seek to not duplicate the existing WTO functions and 
the work that is done elsewhere.  
19.77.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
19.78.   Japan thanks China and Colombia for the initial introduction of the idea s on this agenda.  
19.79.   Japan shares the importance of enhancing the deliberative function on trade and 
environmental sustainability centered  on the CTE. In view of deepening technical and substantial WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 142 - 
 
  discussions on this issue, it is essential to discuss it thor oughly at the CTE rather than to bring up 
the issue to the General Council directly.  
19.80.   Any Member can propose a new agenda item at the CTE. However, we do not see the 
necessity to set up a standing agenda item, which may result in rigid and repetitive discu ssions at 
the committee. In this regard, we welcome the fact that the CTE began the thematic sessions in 
November, which create a space for flexible and informal discussions, and we hope to continue 
constructive discussions in these sessions.  
19.81.   We would also  like to emphasize that, for the purpose of revitalizing the deliberation on this 
issue, it is genuinely necessary to find common themes on trade and environmental sustainability 
among all Members and to deliberate practically and constructively without re peating specific 
principles or positions. It is not helpful for this purpose to attempt to start formal discussions on 
principles, especially those from outside the scope of the WTO Agreements. We hope to have 
discussions that will serve to deepen mutual u nderstanding rather than create division among 
Members.  
19.82.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
19.83.   I would like to thank Members for their comments, notwithstanding the different views. The 
active engagement by Members on this item demo nstrates a common desire to make trade and 
environment mutually supportive, and a strong will for an outcome on trade and environment at 
MC13. An outcome that builds on progress made since MC12 , an outcome that provides concrete 
guidance to our future work  up to MC14  and an outcome that is conducive to turn multilateral 
discussions into collective and cooperative trade actions. As I already mentioned, the global 
environmental challenges are real. MC13 is an opportunity that we cannot afford to miss. China 
would like to work with all Members to strive for balanced and meaningful outcomes on trade and 
environment at MC13.  
19.84.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
20  REVIEW OF THE EXEMPTION PROVIDED UNDER PARAGRAPH 3 OF GATT 1994 
(WT/L/1165 , WT/L/1178)  
20.1.   The Chairp erson  said that p aragraph 3(a) of GATT 1994 provides an exemption from Part II 
of GATT 1994 for measures under specific mandatory legislation – enacted by a Member before it 
became a contracting party to GATT 1947 – which prohibits the use, sale or lease o f foreign -built or 
foreign -reconstructed vessels in commercial applications between points in national waters or waters 
of an exclusive economic zone.  
20.2.   She further noted that i n 1994, the United States  had invoked this provision with respect to 
specific le gislation that met the requirements of that paragraph.  Paragraph 3(b) of GATT 1994 calls 
for a review of this exemption five years after the date of entry into force of the WTO Agreement – 
and thereafter every two years for as long as the exemption is in f orce – to examine whether the 
conditions for the exemption still prevail.  
20.3.   The General Council last considered this matter at its meeting in March 2023. She noted at 
the time that s tatements, questions and responses from interested delegations and the Unite d 
States, together with the annual reports provided by the United States , circulated in WT/L/1165  and 
WT/L/1178 , would form the basis for this year's review. The General Council had also agreed that it 
would consider this matter again at the last meeting of the year in 2023 .This exemption was without 
prejudice to solutions concerning specific aspects of the legislation covered by this exemption 
negotiated in sectoral agreements or in other fora.  
20.4.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
20.5.   The United States welcomes the opportunity to participate in the review of the exemption 
under paragraph 3 of GATT 1994.  This exemption was agreed to by all Members to deal with non -
conforming provisions of domestic legislation of a non -discretionary character in a specific area 
addressed by the exemption, and it is an integral part of the GATT 1994.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 143 - 
 
  20.6.   In paragraph 3(a), Members agreed that as long as the legislation that the United States 
notified prior to the date of entry of force of the WTO Agreement remained in force and was not 
modified to reduce its conformity with Part II of the GATT 1994, Part II would not apply to that 
legislation.  
20.7.   Paragraph 3(b) specifies that Me mbers shall review the exemption every two years to examine 
"whether the conditions which created the need for the exemption still prevail."  
20.8.   The United States confirms that the conditions that created the need for this exemption 
continue to exist, includin g the US Navy's reliance on commercial shipyards for day -to-day 
maintenance of naval and surge -fleet vessels. It also remains critical for US shipbuilders  to build 
commercial ships for trade in order to ensure the maintenance of a viable industrial base to  meet 
future US naval requirements.  
20.9.   In short, the United States has the same need as it had in 1994: to maintain its shipyards' 
readiness to build and maintain naval vessels.  The United States has also continued to provide 
Members with annual statistical r eports under paragraph 3(c) of the GATT 1994, including the most 
recent report submitted in November 2023. These reports provide detailed annual reporting of vessel 
orders and deliveries from US shipyards.  
20.10.   We thank other Members for their interest in this issue. We stand ready to answer Members' 
questions on the topic as needed.  
20.11.   The representative of Japan  delivered the following statement:  
20.12.   The exemption provided under paragraph 3 of GATT 1994 is essentially a serious deviation 
from the fundamental pri nciples of the GATT. Therefore, Japan's position is that the continuation of 
the provisions would undermine the consistency of the entire legal system of the WTO.  
20.13.   Japan expressed its concern on this matter in the Trade Policy Revision of the U nited States 
last year. Japan does not think substantive explanation has been provided by the U nited States at 
the G eneral Council  on why it considers it necessary to avail of this exemption; Japan continues to 
ask the US to share relevant data and  expects the G eneral Council  to conduct a substantial 
examination in order to address whether the condition which originally necessitated this exemption 
still exists.  
20.14.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the following statement:  
20.15.   The European Union supports this r eview process.  I must once again underline our strong 
concerns with this unjustified exemption. The European Union continues to view the Jones Act as a 
piece of legislation that restricts fair competition in the shipbuilding and shipping markets and no 
longer serves a legitimate purpose in today's global economy. Even more, new implementing rules 
show an increasingly protectionist interpretation of the Jones Act, going even further beyond its 
original intention.  
20.16.   The prevailing situation has negative economi c consequences for the European Union's and 
other countries shipbuilding, logistics, dredging, and energy industries. But the costs are also high 
for the United States, which is faced with higher costs for off -shore energy production, coastal 
protection fr om flooding, adapting to climate change, and haulage services due to the closure of the 
US market for foreign -built, serviced, and operated ships.  
20.17.   The representative of Bangladesh  delivered the following statement:  
20.18.   Under this item, the delegation of Bangla desh takes the floor to register its appreciation on 
record for the United States delegation in advance as Bangladesh waits for the responses of the two 
questions sent to the United States on this item. Our delegation looks forward to working with the 
United States on this file.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 144 - 
 
  20.19.   The representative of Norway  delivered the following statement:  
20.20.   This exemption from the GATT 1994 is an important subject for Norway. Our focus is as 
always on the salient point of paragraph 3(b) of the GATT agreement, whether the conditions, which 
created the need for the exemption, still exist. This question seems ev en more relevant when 
considering the fact that the Jones Act has been in effect for more than 103 years.  
20.21.   We note the United States emphasis in the consultations on national security and 
humanitarian emergency reasons, that Jones Act is critical for Unite d States shipbuilding, not least 
of military vessels, and for maintaining enough qualified American mariners.  It is, however, not 
clear whether the United States has considered alternative measures for stimulating activity in the 
United States ship buildi ng sector.  
20.22.   The representative of Panama  delivered the following statement:  
20.23.   I would like to thank the United States for the information that they have provided, for the 
meetings that they have held with interested Members, and for their ongoing readiness to  engage 
with Members on this matter. Panama has a clear interest in matters relating to maritime services, 
and we would simply like to express our interest in continuing to participate in future consultations 
and interactions with the United States on this  subject.  
20.24.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
20.25.   We thank the United States for holding the informal consultation and responding our 
questions in November. However, our concerns remain regarding the Jones Act, in particular, on its 
negative impact on fair competition in shipbuilding and shipping markets.  
20.26.   We urge the United States to actively consider members' concerns and continue engaging 
with relevant members on this issue. We hope the 2023 review could deliver results instead of being 
another recurring point on the agenda.  
20.27.   The representative of the Republic of Korea  delivered the following statement : 
20.28.   Korea thanks the United States for informal consultations it hosted last month and the 
information it provided as part of the review . Korea has voiced its systemic concerns over the US 
exemption under paragraph  3(a) of the GATT 1994. Korea would like to encourage the United States 
to consider potential economic benefits to US businesses and consumers alike by liberalizing this 
sector. Korea hopes the United States will look into the possibility of modifying its implementation 
of the Jones Act in the next review.  
20.29.   The representative of the United States  delivered the following statement:  
20.30.   We take  note of the comments made, particularly tho se who are concerned about our prices 
in the United States . It is very endearing. I would also recommend listening  to a fascinating podcast, 
it is the Trade Talks podcast on subsidization in the shipbuilding industry. You should all listen to it.  
20.31.   The Gener al Council took note  of the statements made in the course of the review in 2023 , 
and that the subsequent review, under the two -yearly cycle provided in paragraph 3(b) of the 
GATT  1994, would  be held in 2025.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 145 - 
 
  21  WAIVERS UNDER ARTICLE IX OF THE WTO AGREEMENT21 
A. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2002 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES 
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION ( G/C/W/831 ) 
B. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2007 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES 
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION ( G/C/W/832 ) 
C. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2012 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES 
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION ( G/C/W/833 ) 
D. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2017 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES 
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION ( G/C/W/834 ) 
E. INTRODUCTION OF HARMONIZED SYSTEM 2022 CHANGES INTO WTO SCHEDULES 
OF TARIFF CONCESSIONS – DRAFT DECISION ( G/C/W/835/Rev.1 ) 
21.1.   The Chairperson  said that there were  a number of sub -items under this agenda item. In this 
regard, she started  by noting that the draft waiver decisions for the matters listed in sub -items 21(A) 
to 21(E) which had been  taken up for consideration by the Coun cil for Trade in Goods at its meeting 
on 30  November. For those  items, the Chairperson invited the Chairperson of the Goods Council to 
report to the General Council.  
21.2.   Ambassador Dr. Adamu Mohammed Abdulhamid (Nigeria), Chair of the Council for Trade in 
Goods, delivered the following report on the CTG's consideration of these matters in a single 
intervention:  
21.3.   I would like to report that, at its meeting of 30 November – 1 December 2023, the Council 
for Trade in Goods considered five collective waiver requests of extensions to the introduction of 
Harmonized System changes for 2002, 2007, 2012, 2017 and 2022 into WTO  Schedules of 
Concessions, which are based  on similar waivers currently in force that will expire on 
31 December  2023. The Council approved the draft  decisions contained in documents G/C/W/ 831, 
G/C/W/832 , G/C/W/833 , G/C/W/834  and G/C/W/835/Rev.1 . The five  draft decisions that are being 
put forward today for consideration by the General Council have followed the procedures provided 
for in Article  IX:3 (b) of the Marrakesh Agreement and are contained in the documents listed in the 
Airgram of today's meeting.  Finally, I would like to note that, at its November meeting, the CTG 
recommended that the five draft waiver decisions contained in these documents be forwarded to the 
General Council for adoption.  
21.4.   The Chairperson  proposed th at, in accordance with the Decision -Making Procedures under 
Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed in November 1995 ( WT/L/93 ), the General Council 
adopt these five draft Decisions referred to by the CTG Chairperson in his report .  
21.5.   The General Council so agreed . 
 
21 In connection with this Item, the attention of Members is drawn to the Decision -Making Procedures 
under Articles IX and XII of the WTO Agreement agreed by the General Council on 15  November 1995 ( WT/L/93 ). WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 146 - 
 
  F. REVIEW OF WAIVERS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE IX:4 OF THE WTO AGREEMENT  
(i) Preferential treatment in favour of services and service suppliers of least developed 
countries, granted on 17  December  2011 until 31 December 2030 ( WT/L/847 , 
WT/L/982)  
(ii) Preferential ta riff treatment for least -developed countries, granted on 
16 October  2019 until 30  June  2029 (WT/L/1069 ) 
(iii) Cuba – Article XV:6 – Extension of waiver, granted on 23 November 2021 until 
31 December 2026 ( WT/L/1128 , WT/L/1179)  
(iv) United States – African Growth and Opportunity Act, granted on 30  November  2015 
until 30  September 2025 ( WT/L/970 , WT/L/1173)  
(v) United States – Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act, granted on 
16 October  2019 until 30 September 2025 ( WT/L/1070 , WT/L/1174)  
(vi) United States – Former Trust Te rritory of the Pacific Islands, granted on 
7 December  2016 until 31 December 2026 ( WT/L/1000 , WT/L/1175)  
(vii) United States – Trade Preferences granted to Nepal, granted on 7 December 2016 
until 31  December 2025 ( WT/L/1001 , WT/L/1176)  
21.6.   The Chairperson  recalled  that, in accordance with paragraph 4 of Article IX of the WTO 
Agreement, "any waiver granted for a period of more than one year shall be reviewed by the 
Ministerial Conference not later than one year after it is granted, and thereafter annually until the 
waiver ter minates." She noted that t here were seven waivers before the General Council for review, 
as listed under sub -item (f) in the proposed Agenda. She also recalled that  these waivers ha d already 
been agreed by the General Council and that they were in force. Therefore, the General Council was 
not expected to take any new decision on their renewal or otherwise at this meeting. She further 
noted that f ive of the waivers under review provide  that an annual report should be submitted by 
the Members concerned. The reports from these Members ha d been circulated in documents 
WT/L/1179  from Cuba, and WT/L/1173  – 1176 from the United  States.  
21.7.   The representative of Guyana , on behalf of CARICOM , delivered the following statement:  
21.8.   I take the opportunity  to express CARICOM's  continued appreciation of the duty -free accorded 
to them for access to the United States market for eligible products from the Caribbean, under the 
Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBER A). As we would have stated before, the U nited States 
remains the region's largest export market and a valuable trading partner, and CBERA is of 
significant economic importance to CARICOM. The programme provides opportunities to expand 
trade between the Un ited States and beneficiary CARICOM countries, thereby promoting the growth 
of economic development and opportunity in the Region.  As small and vulnerable economies, 
CARICOM countries place significant value in this programme and we are appreciative of thi s 
continued support by the United States.  
21.9.   The representative of Antigua and Barbuda , on behalf of the OECS , provided the following 
statement22: 
21.10.   We align with the statement by the  CARICOM Group. We also thank the United States for its 
presentation and repor t. The Caribbean Basin Economic Recovery Act (CBERA) plays a vital role in 
the trade and economic development of OECS countries. In the past two years, four of six OECS 
WTO Members registered a growth in their exports to the US under CBERA. Nonetheless, it  is 
concerning that exports are markedly down compared to a decade ago for all OECS WTO Members. 
This is largely representative of wider structural constraints in our economies, many of them brought 
on by exogenous factors. We shudder to think of what the state of exports would have been in the 
absence of programmes such as CBERA, notwithstanding the structural challenges. This further 
underscores the need for these kinds of programmes and for dedicated attention by the entire 
membership to provide the nece ssary policy space geared towards improving the terms of trade for 
 
22 The statement was not delivered at the meeting but subsequently sent to the Secretariat for inclusion 
in the record.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 147 - 
 
  developing Members. Again, we thank the United States  for its update and look forward to continuing 
to build on this important trade and economic relationship with the United States .  
21.11.   The General Council took note  of the reports contained in the documents mentioned and of 
the statement s. 
22  INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE UNCTAD/WTO  - REPORT OF THE JOINT ADVISORY 
GROUP ON ITS 57TH SESSION (ITC/AG(LVII)/292)  
22.1.   The Chairperson  said that the CTD Chairperson  would provide the General Council with a 
report on the CTD's consideration of the report of the Joint Advisory Group on the Inte rnational 
Trade Centre UNCTAD/WTO . She then invited the CTD Chairperson to report on this matter.  
22.2.   Ambassador S ánchez -Fung (Dominican Republic), Chair of the Committee on Trade and 
Development , delivered the following report:  
22.3.   The ITC's Joint  Advisory Group he ld its 57th Session on 20 July 2023. The report on that 
meeting is contained in document ITC/AG(57)/292.  The report was presented to the CTD at its 122nd 
Session on 17 November by the Chairperson of the Joint Advisory Group, Ambassador Nadia 
Theodore of Ca nada.  Ambassador Theodore noted that, in an ever -evolving global trade landscape, 
the ITC has rightfully maintained its focus on empowering small businesses to compete in regional 
and global markets. Its added value is clear: the ITC presents practical and  innovative solutions that 
small firms can use to navigate these uncertainties and build greater resilience.  
22.4.   At the Joint Advisory Group meeting, delegations shared their perspectives on the pressing 
needs of countries grappling with fragility, uncertaint y, and the post -pandemic recovery. What came 
through, loud and clear, was the importance of finding ways to connect with new markets, especially 
through digital platforms. Delegations recognized the ITC's role in facilitating the transfer of 
technology, pr oviding market intelligence, and empowering small businesses to access and thrive in 
online marketplaces.  
22.5.   It was appreciated that the ITC's value lies in its collaboration with national and international 
partners to identify key stakeholders and needs in beneficiary countries, adhere to global best 
practices, and address local challenges while navigating the intricacies of international markets.  
22.6.   Delegations also expressed appreciation for the ITC's commitment to inclusivity and poverty 
reduction. The ITC's  focus extends beyond merely finding new opportunities for small businesses; 
the organization is equally committed to ensuring that women, youth, refugees, and vulnerable 
communities are driving MSMEs' participation in the global economy.  
22.7.   The SheTrades Hu bs were particularly commended for providing a unique platform that 
encompasses training, tools, and networking opportunities to boost the competitiveness of women -
led businesses. As the ITC's evaluation unit noted, these hubs are a key factor in enhancing  the 
ITC's efficiency and effectiveness. They do so by establishing partnerships with local institutions and 
enabling outreach to a larger number of small businesses led and owned by women. This 
partnership -driven model, as a result, drives scalability to ensure maximum impact.  
22.8.   Appreciation was also expressed for the dedication of ITC staff. This dedication extends to 
internal change management. The ITC Moving Forward initiative, as highlighted by the Executive 
Director, represents a comprehensive roadmap t o build a stronger ITC, tackling prohibited conduct 
and fostering a better workplace culture. This is vital to ensure that the ITC continues to be an agile, 
responsive, and fit for purpose channel to deliver the SDGs through global trade.  
22.9.   To summarize the discussions at the Joint Advisory Group meeting, Ambassador Theodore 
pointed to three main takeaways: First, there was a recognition that, despite the challenging trade 
and aid environment, the ITC continues to deliver at the top of its game, delivering on  its core 
mission of ensuring the competitiveness of small businesses while adapting its offerings to address 
global challenges. Second, it is important for the ITC to scale up its successful approaches so that 
thousands more small businesses in developing  countries are supported to grow and thrive 
sustainably. For this, there was a call for donors to keep financing the ITC's work at the intersection 
of trade and development. Third, it was clear that partnerships are vital for jointly addressing WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 148 - 
 
  challenges,  leveraging strengths, and maximizing impact. Whether in Geneva or in cooperation with 
private sector partners, NGOs, and foundations across the world, ITC is committed to working with 
partners to meet the needs of small businesses.  
22.10.   As is the practice, the  CTD took note of the report of the 57th Session of the Joint Advisory 
Group, and agreed to forward it to the General Council for adoption.  
22.11.   The General Council adopted  the report of the Joint Advisory Group in document 
ITC/AG(LVII)/292 and took note  of the CTD Chairperson's statement.  
22.12.   The representative of Barbados , on behalf of CARICOM , delivered the following statement:  
22.13.   The CARICOM Group appreciates the work done by the ITC during its first year of 
implementing the Strategic Plan 2022 -2025. ITC con tinues to have an important role in supporting 
our MSMEs to be competitive and to be equipped to embrace the green transition and take advantage 
of the very rules and policies that we are discussing here at the WTO.  
22.14.   The Group welcomes some of the specific initiatives such as SheTrades Caribbean which was 
launched earlier this year; the continued excellent work of the Alliances for Action team in many of 
our countries, and the continued attention to supporting our vulnerable economies in reaching our 
climate  commitments.  The ITC's projects linked to food security in the Caribbean have proven helpful 
in our bid to respond to the impact of the COVID -19 pandemic and our regional 25 by 2025 initiative 
where we plan to reduce our dependence on imported food by 25%  by 2025.  
22.15.   Going forward we would welcome more strategic discussions with ITC on their full support 
to SIDS including around the SIDS strategy; more dedicated support of our digital transition, and 
our effective integration into the platform economy, and t echnical support to improve 
competitiveness and productivity of our MSMEs, including better mapping our sustainability related 
needs with the growing offers on the ITC side.  
22.16.   We also welcome more dedicated ITC footprints in the relevant bodies and discussio ns at 
the WTO including on e -commerce, trade and gender, MSMEs and trade and environment where we 
know ITC has important tools and programmes. We would also welcome more regular dialogue on 
priorities and  for delegations in geneva to be kept more apprised of interventions in our countries 
and region.  
22.17.   The representative of the United Kingdom  delivered the following statement:  
22.18.   The ITC, what a terrific organi zation it is. It is an organization  that delivers real impact across 
the developing world despite some very challenging circumstances – so we congratulate them on 
this report and the very successful JAG.  
22.19.   As I said at the JAG, we particularly appreciate the way that the ITC brings us close to what 
actually works for businesses in the developing world, bring ing commercial realism to our policy, 
and turning our policy into commercial reality on the ground. Our own trade partnerships programme 
– UKTP – with the ITC, helps us in the UK to understand what businesses need in order to take full 
advantage of our own , more generous, preferences scheme - the developing countries trading 
scheme. We were pleased to have more than doubled our funding to UKTP this year.  
22.20.   And we are of course extremely proud of the UK -ITC partnership on trade and gender, as I 
would say as co-chair of the informal working group, through the fabulous SheTrades programme. 
Tackling gender inequality is at the very heart of our views as Government on development and on 
trade, and we are delighted to see that programme progress.  
22.21.   The representativ e of Mauritius  delivered the following statement:  
22.22.   Mauritius would like to add its voice to that of the CARICOM and the UK to thank the ITC for 
the tremendous work done by the ITC and which has a significant impact on the ground. We would 
like to highlight the launch of the She Trades Hub in Mauritius this year. We also thank the ITC for 
its work on improving competitiveness specially for small countries. It is one thing to theoretically WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 149 - 
 
  have access to a market and another to actually penetrate that market i n operational terms. We 
look forward to the ITC further deepening its work on Small Island Developing States.  
22.23.   The representative of China  delivered the following statement:  
22.24.   China is pleased to see that the 57th Session of Joint Advisory Group of ITC/UNCTAD /WTO 
was successfully held. And we commend ITC's efforts on supporting MSMEs growth and helping 
developing members achieve economic recovery.  China cherishes the cooperative relationship with 
ITC. Since the first China International Import Expo (CIIE) held  in 2018, ITC has organized 325 
MSMEs from more than 30 members to participate in the event. Their participation has generated 
businesses of around 65 million US dollars in total.  
22.25.   Furthermore, ITC and WTO collaboration on trade has been very fruitful for development 
and inclusiveness purposes. For example, ITC help businesses like MSMEs understand, adapt to and 
benefit from trade rules. It also contributes to the topic of women empowerment by implementing 
programs facilitating women entrepreneurs. It colla borates with WTO on trade facilitation, in 
particular through the WTO Trade Facilitation Agreement Facility. Its work on Investment Facilitation 
for Development is very solid. By implementing "Fostering Knowledge and A Common Understanding 
on Investment Fa cilitation Project", the ITC strengthens the capacity of developing and least 
developed members of participating in the WTO negotiations on IFD Agreement through a series of 
regional seminars and workshops, and also supports members conducting investment f acilitation 
self-assessment through experience sharing. Next year, ITC will celebrate its 60th anniversary. 
China looks forward to deepening the cooperation with ITC and its work with the WTO.  
22.26.   The representative of the European Union  delivered the followin g statement:  
22.27.   The European Union welcomes the report just made. The ITC does tremendous work, which 
makes a difference on the ground. The European Union and European Union Member States are 
major donors and partners of the International Trade Centre. I woul d like to thank the ITC and all 
its partners for their support of work on MSMEs worldwide and women's economic empowerment. 
This includes least -developed and conflict -affected countries and vulnerable groups, as well as, as I 
said, women.  
22.28.   The representative of Kazakhstan  delivered the following statement:  
22.29.   I thank the ITC for all its work and would like to recall that in  the MC12 Outcome Document, 
we had a paragraph on recognizing women's economic empowerment and contribution of MSMEs to 
inclusive and sustainable economic growth, and we also made commitments that the WTO will be 
working with ITC and UNCTAD in implementing this provision of the MC12 Outcome Document. In 
this regard, we are working very successfully with  the ITC in the Central Asian region within the 
framework of the EU funded project, ready for trade in Central Asia and with strong emphasis on 
women who are engaged in e -commerce . The ITC is providing capacity building within that 
framework , as well as helping these businesses t o get financing as well as implement their projects. 
So, this is an opportunity when I can also call on Members to support the ITC because the ITC 
receives financing from international organizations, as well as from bilateral donors. With the support 
of Me mbers and bilateral donors, the ITC will be able to do more in order to make difference, 
particularly for MSMEs and women in trade.  
22.30.   The Director -General  delivered the following statement:  
22.31.   I just wanted to say how wonderful it is to hear these very supporti ve comments for the ITC. 
I mean, it is part of us. I am very proud of the work they do, and I want to commend Miss Pamela 
Coke-Hamilton and the staff of the ITC. I know Dorothy is online.  
22.32.   The representative of the ITC, speaking as an Observer , delivered t he following statement:  
22.33.   Let me begin by thanking Ambassador Sánchez Fung for his report. I also acknowledge and 
thank Ambassador Nadia Theodore for steering the Joint Advisory Group this year.  Excellencies, may 
I also extend my thanks to all of you for the kind words  of appreciation.  Your feedback today and all 
that the Members have shared with us since the JAG have been very invaluable to the ITC team and WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 150 - 
 
  we are all taking this to heart as we prepare for the year ahead, particularly as it relates to our  work 
on fragility, digital connectivity and inclusivity.  
22.34.   This year's SME competitiveness outlook focuses on fragility. Equally, we are now scaling up 
our work on digital connectivity with the aim of helping MSMEs explore digital marketplaces  and 
ensure th at they have skills they need to engage in e -commerce and digital entrepreneurship. On 
inclusivity, the ITC will continue to work on gender equality and youth empowerment. As always, 
sustainability remains important and at the core of the work that we unde rtake.  
22.35.   In this regard, we will keep delivering practical solutions for our MSMEs clients to capitalize  
on green opportunities and build resilience. We will continue expanding the scope and scale of our 
interventions in order to achieve greater impact in ou r beneficiary countries.  Finally, in closing, I 
wanted to take this opportunity and inform Members that next year is a special year. The ITC will 
be celebrating its 60th anniversary and we will do this through a series of events and outreach efforts 
both i n Geneva and across the region.  
22.36.   I wish to extend our appreciation to our partners for their trust in  the ITC. I also take this 
opportunity to reaffirm our dedication to supporting our beneficiaries. Last but not least, I also wish 
to thank the WTO and UNC TAD for being there to support the work that we are doing and really 
guiding us in all that we do.  
22.37.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
23  REVIEW OF WTO ACTIVITIES  
(i) General Council ( WT/GC/W/907 ), Dispute Settlement Body ( WT/DSB/85 ) and 
Trade Policy Review Body ( WT/TPR/509 ) 
(ii) Sectoral Councils ( G/L/1524 , S/C/64 , and IP/C/98)  
(iii) Committees  on Trade and Development ( WT/COMTD/103  ), Trade and Environment 
(WT/CTE/30 ), Balance -Of-Payments Restrictions ( WT/BOP/R/123 ), Budget, Finance and 
Administration ( WT/BFA/218 ) and Regional Trade Agreements ( WT/REG/34 ) 
(iv) Working Groups on Trade, D ebt and Finance ( WT/WGTDF/22 ), and Trade and 
Transfer of Technology ( WT/WGTTT/25 ) 
(v) Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements ( GPA/AR/6 , WT/L/1177  – 
TCA/21)  
23.1.   The Chairperson  took up  the reports listed under item  23, which ha d been prepared in line 
with the Decision concerning Procedures for an Annual Ov erview of WTO Activities and for Reporting 
under the WTO ( WT/L/105 ). Delegations ha d already had substantive discussions on these reports 
in the respective bodies where they had already been  adopted, and therefore the Chairperson 
suggested not to repeat those dis cussions in the General Council. She also noted that, in line with 
the reporting obligations, reports from the respective bodies would  be forwarded to the Ministerial 
Conference. She proposed that, in accordance with practice, the General Council took action on 
these reports. She therefore  invited the General Council to adopt the report of the Committee on 
Trade and Development in document WT/COMTD/103 , and to take note of the reports of the other 
WTO bodies, including the reports of the Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements, listed 
in the Proposed Agenda.  
23.2.   The General Council so agreed . 
23.3.   The Chairperson  then proposed  that the General Council adopt the draft Report of the General 
Council contained in document WT/GC/W/907 , on the understanding that the Secretariat would  
make the necessary adjustments to that Report to include matters that have been considered at this 
meeting.  The Annual Report of the General Council would  then be forwarded to the Ministerial 
Conference.  
23.4.   The General Council so agreed . WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 151 - 
 
  24  APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS TO WTO BODIES – ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE 
CHAIRPERSON PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 7.1(A) OF THE GUIDELINES ( WT/L/510 ) 
24.1.   The Chairperson  recalled that the relevant Guidelines provide d that the outgoing General 
Council Chairperson would conduct consultations on the Appointment of Chairpersons to the 
WTO Bodies in Groups 1, 2, 4 and 5 of its Annex. Given the busy period ahead, she noted that she 
had initiated this process already on 6 November.  In accordance with the Guidelines, she ha d been 
assisted in this process by Ambassador Petter Ølberg (Norway), Chairperson of the Dispute 
Settlement Body, and Ambassador Dacio Castillo (Hon duras), former Chairperson of the General 
Council.  A list of past Chairpersons of major bodies was made  available to delegations at this 
meeting. The Chairperson  said that, in accordance with the Guidelines, representatives of Members 
in financial arrears for over one full year could not  be considered for appointment.  
24.2.   The Chairperson  informed Members that she had  first met on 9 November with the four group 
coordinators – (i) Africa, (ii)  Asia and the Pacific; (iii) Latin America and the Caribbean, and 
(iv) developed countries. As announced in her communication on 9 November, she had requested 
group coordinators to communicate their expressions of interest by 6 December. She had met group 
coordinators again on Friday, 8 December, and was pleased to note that there was  an emerging 
draft slate of names.  
24.3.   She said her intention was to send a communication to all Members before the end-of-year 
break containing the draft slate of na mes with a view to preparing  the ground for an informal General 
Council meeting in the New Year to finalize the slate of names as early as possible  in 2024 . She 
added that t his way , Members were on track to  complete the  shared objective of finalizing the 
crucially important housekeeping function and, in doing so, ensure a smooth conduct of WTO bodies 
in 2024.  
24.4.   The General Council took note  of the Chairperson's statement.  
25  OTHER BUSINESS  
25.1  Statement by the Chairperson in connection with Administrative Measures for 
Members in Arrears  
25.1.   The Chairperson  recalled that the General Council Procedures for Members and Observers 
subject to Administrative Measures in WT/BFA/132  required that, at the end of each meeting of the 
General Council, the Chai r of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration provided 
information with regard to which Members and Observers were under Administrative Measures.  
25.2.   Ambassador Bettina Waldmann (Germany), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administ ration , delivered the following statement23: 
25.3.   The Administrative Measures applicable to Members and Observers in arrears have been in 
place since 1 March 2013.  In accordance with a decision previously taken by the General Council, I 
shall state all Members  and Observers under all categories of administrative measures.  
25.4.   However, before doing so, I would like to acknowledge a payment received from one Member 
since my last report to you on 1 November. As a result of this payment, Yemen, which was previously 
in Category III, is still subject to Administrative Measures but now in Category II. I would also like 
to take this opportunity to encourage other Members under Category III to make use of the 
possibility of initiating consultations towards the establishment of a payment plan, if that is helpful 
to them in meeting their obligations.  
25.5.   Having said that, as of today, 15 December 2023, there are a total of 15 Members and 
6 Observers subject to Administrative Measures.  
25.6.   The following 4 Members are currently in Cate gory I: Afghanistan; Congo; Ghana; and 
Suriname.  
 
23 The statement by the CBFA Chairperson was subsequently circulated in JOB/GC/379 . WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 152 - 
 
  25.7.   The following 5 Members are in Category II: Cuba; Dominica; El Salvador; Guinea; and 
Yemen.  
25.8.   The following 6 Members are in Category III: Antigua and Barbuda; Central African Republic; 
Chad; Guinea -Bissau; P apua New Guinea; and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela. Central African 
Republic and Chad are not compliant with payment plan terms.  
25.9.   There is only one Observer in Category I: Comoros.  
25.10.   The following 2 Observers are in Category II: Lebanese Republic; and  South Sudan.  
25.11.   There are also 3 Observers in Category III: Sao Tomé and Principe; Somalia; and Syria.  
25.12.   The Chairperson  noted that, as also required by the General Council Procedures, she 
requested Members and Observers in Categories II and III of the Measur es to inform the Secretariat 
as to when their payment of arrears could be expected.  
25.13.   The General Council took note  of the statement.  
_______________  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 153 - 
 
   
ANNEX I  
STATEMENT BY DJIBOUTI, ON BEHALF OF THE LDC GROUP, DELIVERED AT THE 
CTG MEETING  ON 30 NOVEMBER 20231 
CTG AGENDA ITEM 4  - PRINCIPLES GUIDING THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION 
OF TRADE RELATED ENVIRONMENTAL MEASURES – COMMUNICATION FROM THE AFRICAN 
GROUP ( G/C/W/830 ) 
 
Chair, the LDC Group has the pleasure to intervene in support of the principles found in the Africa 
Group submissi on. In particular, for all LDCs and one LDC is sited in the paper. LDCs also export 
products that can be impacted by unilateral environment measures. We also are not generating the 
responsibility of the climate crisis.  
 
We note that the paper has indicate d that "WTO rules do not prevent countries from adopting 
environmental policies. WTO rules allow complementary trade measures that are conducive to 
effective implementation of domestic environmental policies but aim to prevent such measures from 
creating d isguised restrictions to trade. Therefore,  climate measures that restrict our market access, 
should indeed be avoided.  
 
The African Group paper sets out important principles that should be recognised in the WTO to 
ensure that in efforts to implement measu res for trade and environment do not result in adverse 
consequences, especially for LDCs and developing countries.  
 
CTG AGENDA ITEM 5  - MEASURES TO ALLOW GRADUATED LDCS, WITH GNP BELOW USD 
1,000, BENEFITS PURSUANT TO ANNEX VII(B) OF THE AGREEMENT ON SUBSI DIES AND 
COUNTERVAILING MEASURES – REQUEST FROM DJIBOUTI ON BEHALF OF THE LDC GROUP 
(G/C/W/752 ) 
 
The LDC Group in this case is only seeking a clarification: that an LDC after graduation from the LDC 
category, if remains below the 1000 USD threshold under 1990 c onstant USD term, would be able 
to avail the flexibility of Art 27.2 (a) of ASCM, in a manner of inclusion in Annex VII.b.  
 
We do not want to change the rules, nor do we want to create any additional flexibility for us. Our 
only objective is to bring uniformity in treatment under an ASCM provision which is already existing 
in WTO, under Annex VII.b for those countries listed.  
 
In that regard those having graduated from the LDC category be deemed listed among developing 
countries identified pursuant to Annex  VII(b) to the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures, if their GNP per capita is below US D1,000 in constant 1990 dollars at the time of 
graduation and they will remain in the list until their GNP per capita reaches US D1,000 in constant 
1990 dollars for three consecutive years.  
 
If any such graduated least -developed country Member is excluded from the list of Annex  VII(b) to 
the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures because its GNP per capita reached 
USD1000 for three consecut ive years, that graduated least -developed country shall be re -included 
when its GNP per capita falls below US D1,000 in constant 1990 dollars.  
 
CTG AGENDA ITEM 12 - MC12 IMPLEMENTATION MATTERS: FUNCTIONING OF THE CTG 
AND ITS SUBSIDIARY BODIES AND WTO RESPON SE TO THE PANDEMIC  
 
Thank you Chair,  
We take the floor to put on record at the CTG that we have been asked to bring to the attention of 
the CTG our views on reform of the functioning of committees and councils.  
 
The LDC Group supports such improvements p articularly those that had a genesis in the LDC Group 
submission JOB/GC/223/Rev.1 . Those include use of annotated  agendas, expediting the production 
 
1 This statement has been included in the Annex of the De cember General Council meeting at the request 
of the delegation of Djibouti, on behalf of the LDC Group.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 154 - 
 
  of minutes, mechanisms to avoid overlapping of key meetings, summary notes the same day of 
meetings, and translation provided for all informal meetings.  
 
To complement the work done, we suggest that some improvements in the process of the reform 
could be considered. For example, future proposals requiring adoption and of a crosscutting nature 
with impact on LDC participation in WTO bodies, should be sent to the General Council for discussion 
and decision. LDCs and small delegations are all at the General Council. LDCs are in the best place 
to evaluate the impact of reform by doing proposals on their participation in the WTO.  
 
Some recent adoptions, for ex ample the change of the 10-day rule to 15 days, (in the CTG, CMA, 
CTS) we understand there are two sides, 1) to receive documents earlier and this was important for 
specific trade concerns; and 2) where most LDCs bring for our agenda items and documents an d we 
need more time to prepare. Some of our Members thought that the change meant more time to 
prepare. This is not the case for us. We did not reverse these adoptions to not stand in the way and 
change anything.  
 
However, we request the CTG to recommend to the General Council, that the change of the 10 rule 
to 15 days be implemented on a trial basis. This is similar to what was already agreed in some of 
the bodies where it was agreed to apply the e -agenda on a trial basis. This is a good idea that came 
from the process.  
 
We can also test the impact on the LDC Group and LDCs.  
 
We also feel that while some steps may have been taken, more effort must be made to avoid 
overlapping meetings. There are a number of clashes in the last three months that posed ser ious 
challenges for LDCs.  
 
Finally, while useful in some cases, the "written procedure " and circulating proposals for adoption 
during summer recess should be avoided.  
 
We reiterate our applause to the Secretariat, and the CTG for all of the great work do ne on several 
areas of reform of the functioning of the various committees and the CTG.  
 
_______________  
 
 
 
 WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 155 - 
 
   
 
ANNEX II  
WRITTEN STATEMENTS BY THE DELEGATION OF INDIA – SUBSEQUENTLY SUBMITTED 
FOR INCLUSION IN THE RECORDS IN ADDITION TO THE ORAL STATEMENTS  
Item 3.A(i) - WTO Reform – "Reform by doing" - Statement by Chairperson 
(JOB/GC/359/Rev.2 ; G/L/1523 ) 
 
India would again like to commend the Secretariat for the compilation in document 
JOB/GC/359/Rev.2 . These incremental improvements have been very useful in facilitating the 
participation Members, particularly the smaller delegations. As we appro ach to MC, we need to work 
on improving conduct of Ministerial Meetings as well as process leading thereto for transparency and 
inclusiveness and  ensuring wider participation of Members in decision -making process.  
 
There is need for continuing this process  of incremental reform. Several suggestions by Members 
are in the pipelines. While a number of short -term implementation suggestions from our proposal 
dubbed as 30 for 30 have been implemented, there are certain medium to long term suggestions 
which still require early consideration, like  productive apps, website management, manner and 
extent of external stakeholder engagement and communication, WTO Rules and procedures and 
Committee specific suggestions.  
 
The term "reform by doing" is understood differentl y by Members. In this context we would also 
urge that reform or incremental change has to member driven and consensus based that does not 
alter right and obligation of Members and adhere strictly to foundation principles of the organisation. 
These should n ot add to the burden and should not marginalised role of Members.  
  
WTO reform should, however, not be envisioned as a tool of creating new mandates, or prioritising 
new agenda, while shelving the pending agenda and mandates. The organisation would be fit  for 
purpose by improving the working of organisation to make them open, transparent, inclusive and 
efficient.  
 
On G/L/1523 :  
We welcome the report G/L/1523  submitted by the Council for Trade in Goods. Following the MC12 
mandate, India's paper WT/GC/W/874  laid the foundation for a purposeful discussion on improving 
the WTO's operational efficiency. We are delighted that CTG, and its 14 subsidiary bodies have 
implemented 127 improvements. My delegation has been engaged deeply and constructively in this 
exercise. While our paper envisaged 30 improvements to the WTO before it completes 30 years, I 
believe we should up the ambition and replicate the CTG successes elsewhere to make it 300 for 30.  
 
Item 3.A(ii ) - Paragraph 24 of the Ministerial Declarati on on the WTO Response to the 
COVID -19 Pandemic and Preparedness for Future Pandemics – Statement By The 
Chairperson ( G/L/1521 )  
  
As India has emphasised previously, our work on the pandemic response is not over.  
 
In fact, GAVI estimates that there is a 38% chance of a future pandemic similar to COVID -19 during 
one's lifetime. This was presented by WHO in their presentation during the experience sharing 
session organi zed by the Council for Trade in services, report of which is contained in 
JOB/SERV/CTS/21/Rev.1 . 
 
In pursuance of MC12 guidance underlining the critical role of services in ensuring resilience during 
COVID -19 and future pandemics, in July meeting, the General Council addressed two submissions 
by India related to the pandemic res ponse, on the role of telemedicine services ( WT/GC/W/866 ) and 
on building a pool of health professionals to respond to pandemics and natural disasters 
(WT/GC/W/867 ). 
 
During the Pandemic, several countries took measures to facilitate adoption of telemedicine . The 
Indian Government too undertook many initiatives. The Indian government launched the e -
Sanjeevani, a web -based platform that integrates registration, queue management, generation of 
e-prescriptions, short  message service, and e -mail notifications. So  far, e -Sanjeevani has crossed WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 156 - 
 
  an astounding milestone by clocking 100 million teleconsultations. This platform has facilitated 
healthcare access across the country especially rural and isolated communities. It is designed for 
scale and low -cost uptake by health providers and patients.  
 
Further, the government launched the COVID -19 Vaccine Intelligence Network (CoWIN), a state -of-
the-art digital solution for one of the world's largest COVID -19 vaccination programmes. India 
offered the technological prowess  of the Co -WIN platform as a Digital Public Infrastructure (DPI) 
freely to all countries in the fight against COVID -19. India has so far achieved the historic milestone 
of 2.2 billion doses of vaccinations.  
 
India also launched the Aarogya Setu app, aimed  at COVID -19 contact tracing, self -assessment and 
informing the citizens about the best practices/relevant advisories pertaining to the containment of 
COVID -19. This open -source app is a readily available package for developers Measures were also 
taken by Members to reduce demands on public healthcare system which we have briefly captured 
in our submission.  
 
As borne out by WTO TISMOS data, cross -border trade in medical services (Mode 1) is most suitable 
mode in pandemic like situations as this increased by  14% while Mode 2 and 4 supply fell sharply. 
However, cross -border trade in medical services remains much below its potential. There is, 
therefore, an urgent need to facilitate this trade to respond to pandemics and future Pandemics.  
 
Further, at the glob al level, COVID -19 pandemic presented a unique situation where surpluses and 
shortages of health -related resources existed simultaneously as the pandemic came in waves, 
affecting different regions of the world at different times. Both situations of pandemi cs and natural 
disasters necessitate coordinated action across geographies for their management, mitigation and 
eventual recovery. To the extent that these crises do not affect all geographies at the same time 
and with same severity, such coordinated actio n and burden -sharing becomes easier. A critical 
element of response to such crises is the availability and deployment of health professionals.  
 
We have therefore, in our submission proposed the idea of establishing a globally recognized pool 
of trained he alth professionals which could be drawn by a country in need of these resources during 
a crisis. This collective burden -sharing arrangement would be in the spirit of international solidarity 
during situations of pandemics/natural disasters. Establishing su ch a pool of resources would, inter 
alia, require skill mapping, matchmaking, and augmenting supplies by temporarily relaxing regimes 
at both regional and global levels. A critical element to facilitate the deployment of such a global 
pool of health resour ces is development of a multilateral framework/norms for the recognition of 
professional qualifications, in coordination with the relevant international organizations. This would 
be a crucial step in building preparedness for pandemics/natural disasters. S uch professionals may 
also be granted special mobility rights or exemption from general movement restrictions.  
 
Such multilateral solidarity in times of crises is essential for an effective response to 
pandemics/natural disasters. It is both ethically desi rable and practically conceivable in this context. 
Despite the significant potential which foreign health professionals possess to respond to surge in 
demand for the services in another country, the offtake of their services remains limited owing to 
the wa y regulations attached to it are managed. For better preparedness to deal with future 
pandemic like situations, there is a need to strengthen implementation of GATS disciplines and 
facilitate recognition of such professionals so that they are able to deliv er effectively. In our two 
submissions, we have drawn attention to the questions posed by India which focus on experience 
sharing for these two submissions including challenges, opportunities, trade facilitation aspects.  
 
On 13 June, WTO Members discussed  the implications of the COVID -19 pandemic for transport and 
logistics services in an informal experience -sharing session. Under discussion were the main 
challenges Members encountered, the trade -facilitative measures governments introduced in the 
wake of the pandemic, and the implications of the crisis. India too presented its experience of how 
Deendayal Port, which is the leader among 12 major ports of India in terms of volume of cargo 
handled the crisis.  
 
We look forward to further discussions both at t he GC and at the Council for Trade in Services to 
analyse lessons that have been learned and challenges experienced during the COVID -19 pandemic 
including on India's two submissions. I also look forward to these important discussions being 
reported to MC13  and seek further guidance from Ministers at the MC13 to continue future work on 
response to the Pandemic.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 157 - 
 
   
Chair, I will draw attention to India's paper JOB/CTG/36 , also submitted to various other WTO bodies, 
which detailed India's national response to the pandemic. This paper was not a part of any 
notification obligation but an effort on our part to explain the multifaceted response to the pandemic 
and the key role  played by India's trade related government institutions in this response.  
 
Item 3.A (iii) - Paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement – Duration 
of Extended Deadline1 - Decision Text on Extension of the 17 June 2022 Ministerial 
Decis ion to COVID -19 Therapeutics and Diagnostics – Communication from South Africa 
(WT/GC/W/913  - IP/C/W/694/Rev.1 ) 
 
We thank the Chair of the TRIPS Council for her report. We echo the views of co -sponsors who spoke 
before me and align ourselves with the statement made by South Africa on behalf of co -sponsors. 
It is regrettable that a decision remains elusive for this multilateral body on such a critical issue of 
global significance. Despite protracted deliberations, over three years, we have disappoin ted the 
world that was anticipating a quick multilateral response from the organization.  
 
Several rounds of submissions have been made on this issue, responding to all questions raised and 
clarifications sought by Members, and extensive discussions have presented extensive facts and 
evidence to guide us in making a decision, thus, Chair I urge all Members to engage with good faith 
and conclude our discussions today, by taking a decision; we hope we all are able to agree for the 
extension of the MC12 decision to therapeutics and diagnostics as presented in the document 
IP/C/W/694 /Rev.1. because the  longer the decision remains pending the less effective and 
redundant the outcome will be.  
 
Item 3.A (iv) - Work Programme on Electronic Commerce  
 
- Report by the Facilitator  
 
- Challenges for digital industrialization in developing countries – 
Communication from South Africa ( WT/GC/W/910 ) 
 
- Draft Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce - 
Communication from Australia; Canada; Chile; Costa Rica; Georgia; Hong Kong, 
China; Iceland; Israel; Korea, Republic of; Liechtenstein ; Moldova, Republic of; 
Montenegro; Norway; New Zealand; Paraguay; Peru; Singapore; Switzerland; 
Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen And Matsu; Ukraine 
and The United Kingdom ( WT/GC/W/909 ) 
 
- Draft Ministerial Decision on the Work Programme  on Electronic Commerce – 
Communication from South Africa ( WT/GC/W/911 ) 
 
We thank Ambassador Usha for her efforts in steering the Work Programme on E -Commerce. While 
the work programme has been reinvigorated in the General Council, other mandated bodies lik e the 
CTG, CTS, Council for TRIPS and CTD should also follow suit. India has contributed constructively to 
this process of the reinvigoration of the work programme in the GC and we expect these rich 
discussions to continue in 2024 and beyond.  
  
Customs du ties have traditionally been used to confer level playing field to domestic industries and 
influence demand of imported goods. The cost of the moratorium on customs duties is being 
disproportionately borne by the developing country having large market, by extending duty free 
market access largely for the developed countries. We have not yet seen convincing evidence by the 
proponents of the moratorium that its continuation has benefitted developing countries and LDCs. 
We believe that while digital industrial ization holds the promise for economic development and 
prosperity for the developing countries including the LDCs, no policy tool should be foreclosed in this 
pursuit of development and economic prosperity through digital industrialisation. While our views  on 
the paper WT/GC/W/909  are clear, the capital continues to study the South Africa paper 
WT/GC/W/911 . We welcome South Africa's paper WT/GC/W/910 , which summarizes the findings of 
the Competition Commission of South Africa on how some large platforms are c ornering the benefits 
 
1 WT/L/1141  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 158 - 
 
  of global digital economy. This paper is a good complement to the paper WT/GC/W/902/Rev.1  
submitted jointly by India and South Africa.  
 
Item 9 - LDC Graduation  (Annex  2 of WT/GC/W/807/R ev.2) – Report by the Chairperson 
of the Committee on Trade and Development to the General Council  (WT/COMTD/LDC/30 ) 
 
It is encouraging the LDC graduation - Annex 2 has been discussed in the Committee in some length. 
However, a shared understanding of different dimensions of Annex 2 provisions have not been 
achieved so far. We urge Members to be sympathetic towards the needs of LDC Members and 
expedite discussion on Annexure 2 in a constructive and time bound manner.  
 
Item 15 - Technology  Transfer and Economic Resilience – Request from the African Group  
 
Technology is one of most essential input f or structural transformation and productive capacity 
development. It is therefore a critical enabler for developing countries to make progress towards the 
sustainable development goals. However, developing countries remains strongly dependent 
technologies resources that remains in the strong confines of developed countries. Fast technological 
development opens opportunities to address both long -standing and new challenges confronting 
developing countries. The rapid pace of change makes technology transfer a nd adoption a more 
complex and costly process.  
The climate action, the pandemic, expansion of e -commerce, explosive ICT growth, industrial 
digitalisation, have all heightened the need of technology transfer as the gap widens rapidly.  
 
The increased need and critical requirement of technology transfer could be assessed from the fact, 
as projected by UNCTAD, that in 17 Frontier technologies such as artificial intelligence, Internet of 
Things, 3D printing, robotics, big data, nano technolo gy, green hydrogen, and electric vehicles etc., 
the market size was USD 1.5 trillion in 2020. Thanks to their rapid growth, by 2030 their market 
value could reach over USD 9.5 trillion.   
 
However, technology transfer to developing countries faces hurdles i ncluding those emanating from 
international trade Rules like TRIPS, the lack of resources and capacity in Developing countries to 
access, adopt, adapt and afford technologies.  
 
The invigoration of discussion on technology transfer is encouraging. Technolog y transfer is a priority 
issue for us. We welcome the submissions made by the Africa Group and support it. We hope that a 
concrete mandate would be delivered in the MC13 on this issue.  The WTO recognizes the close 
relationship between trade and the transfe r of technology, as evidenced in the establishment of the 
Working Group on Trade and Technology Transfer (WGTTT) in 2002. The role of the WGTTT was to 
discuss ways to increase technology flows from developed to developing countries. The issue of 
technology  transfer is now perhaps more important than ever before, given the central role of 
development and transfer of environmentally sound technology (EST) to address climate change. 
India's paper JOB/WGTTT/2 , also submitted to the Committee on Trade and Environment and Council 
for TRIPS makes a case for advancing these discussions in the WTO.  
 
Item 17 - EUROPEAN UNION REGULATION ON SUPPLY CHAINS FREE FROM 
DEFORESTATION AND FOREST DEGRADATION – COMMUNICATION FROM ARGENTINA, 
COLOMBIA, DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, GU ATEMALA, HONDURAS, PANAMA, PARAGUAY, AND 
PERU ( WT/GC/W/912 ) 
 
Chair, we thank the co -sponsors of this agenda for bringing this issue to the General Council. Our 
paper JOB/TE/78/Rev.1  submitted jointly with South Africa highlights our broad concerns wi th the 
growing list of environment -related trade measures. Despite claiming to make an environmental 
impact, these measures exclude from design the well -established principles of global environment 
law such as Common but Differentiated  Responsibilities – Respective Capabilities and the concept of 
Nationally Determined Contributions.  
 
Specifically in the case of EU Deforestation Regulation, we have voiced our concerns both bilaterally 
as well as here in the WTO. This regulation qualifies as a typical NTM blo cking the market access of 
developing countries to the EU market, while providing no evidence that the regulation will meet the 
intended objectives outlined by the EU.  
 WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 159 - 
 
  The regulation in its current form heavily empowers EU's own economic operators in seek ing 
business critical data from the exporters, disregards efforts being made on afforestation by EU's 
trade partners and imposes its own regulatory choices without accounting for the operation 
conditions prevailing in other countries. The regulation will h arm vulnerable segments like women 
working as farm labour, women entrepreneurs in agriculture as well as the MSMEs, whose interests 
EU apparently seeks to preserve in this organization.  
 
Item 18 - INFORMATION ON INVESTMENT FACILITATION FOR DEVELOPMENT – REQUEST 
FROM CHILE AND THE REPUBLIC OF KOREA ( JOB/GC/373 )2 
 
Chair, first of all, India would like to thank the coordinators of the informal process for this 
submission meant only for information of the membership. If you recall, the day before yesterday, 
India had sought a sp ecific clarification as to whether this proposal was only for information. One of 
the coordinators, Chile, had confirmed that it was indeed for information only. Chair, you also had 
confirmed this. I thank all the respondents who have spoken on this topic.  Negotiation on Investment 
does not belong to WTO. India's concern emanates from the fact that proponents of IFD, a Joint 
Statement Initiative (JSI) process, should not be attempting to bring a non -mandated, non -
multilateral issue to the formal process in the WTO in violation of the WTO framework and 
fundamental rule of consensus -based decision -making for starting a negotiation.  
 
There has not been any Ministerial mandate for starting negotiations on investment -related matters. 
Several attempts have been ma de in the past to push this agenda, starting from the 1st MC and till, 
the 11th MC. However, these attempts ended with a negative mandate every time.  
 
The negative mandate did not allow the Members, desirous of IFD, to pursue it in a multilateral 
forum up on a consensus. Therefore, to circumvent the negative mandate and short -circuit the 
consensus requirement that is fundamental to initiating any formal discussion in WTO architecture, 
certain Members began an informal process that did not have any legal san ctity, and now, at the 
end of their informal process, these members are back to consensus seeking on their outcome of an 
informal process the foundation of which is devoid of consensus. What could be more ironic in WTO 
than this, i.e., violating the treaty -embedded right of members to start consensus -based  
negotiations on mandated issues, and then at the end of such unrecognized and unlawful process, 
seeking consensus from those very members whose treaty -embedded right was intentionally vitiated 
in the firs t instance.  
 
In this context, I would like to take Members back in memory, and I'm sure those who were here in 
2017 during the May General Council meeting would be aware of the historical facts of this subject. 
In this regard, India would like to draw att ention of members to four facts, -  
 
i. One is what we call the July 2004 framework. I would like to place this on record  
document number WT/L/579  dated 2 August 2004, as part of our statement. As 
captured in this document, the GC gave an explicit negative mandate to this topic and  
on initiating any negotiation or even taking this item in any Work Programme. The 
relevant para of this document reads as below:  
"Relationship between Trade and Investment, Interaction between Trade and  
Competition Policy and Transparency  in Government Procurement: The Council agrees 
that these issues, mentioned in the Doha Ministerial Declaration in paragraphs 20 -22, 
23-25 and 26 respectively, will not form part of the Work Programme set out  in that 
Declaration and therefore no work towar ds negotiations on any of these issues  will 
take place within the WTO during the Doha Round." [Para 1(g)].  
 
ii. It is also worth recalling that the Doha Declaration, in para 20, envisaged that 
negotiations on this topic could only be on the basis of a decision to be taken by explicit 
consensus. July framework made it explicit that there was a negative consensus in t he 
Council.  
iii. In the Nairobi Ministerial 2015, i.e., just eight years back, which in the WTO context  
is not very distant, negative mandate again continued on this issue along with certain  
 
2 In this regard, please also note WT/GC/262  which was circulated on 21 December 2024 at the request 
of India.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 160 - 
 
  other issues. I am not saying non -mandated issues but the negative ma ndate of  
Ministers not to have negotiation on such subjects on which all members have not  
agreed to discuss in consensus, such as Competition, Government Procurement, and  
this issue of investment facilitation. Paragraph 34 of the Nairobi Ministerial declar ation 
reads as below: "34. While we concur, that officials should prioritize work where results 
have not yet been achieved, some wish to identify and discuss other issues for 
negotiation; others do not. Any decision to launch negotiations multilaterally on  such 
issues would need to be agreed by all Members.".  
iv. Then, of course, we had in 2017 the GC deliberation over two days, 10 May and  18 
May in 2017. The minutes thereof are available in the WTO document No. 
WT/GC/M/167 , dated 21 July 2017. This is the third  document which I would like to  
place on record as part of my statement. Clearly, members interested in discussions  
on investment facilitation had stated that their proposed informal dialogue on the issue 
was only for information sharing and that there was  no intention to start negotiation.  
Further, India had opposed the agenda in the May 2017 GC meeting to begin with.  However, India 
was asked to allow the agenda as it was not a proposal to start any  negotiations. It was mentioned 
that members involved in informal discussions wished only to inform other members of an informal 
process they wanted to initiate. The observations of the GC Chair were as follows:  
 
"Members will recall the July 2004 General Council Decision (as contained in WT/L/579 ) as 
well as paragraph 34 of the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration…. It is noted that the proponents 
seek to share information on informal dialogues on investment facilitation, and that the 
communications do not constitute proposals for negotiations. Proponents belie ve that informal 
dialogues on investment facilitation are important.  
 
It is also noted that some Members believe that investment facilitation does not lie within the scope 
of the WTO and hence the General Council. Finally, pursuant to rules 2 and 4 of the  Rules of 
Procedure for the General Council, we note that the General Council is not required to take any 
decisions under this item of the agenda.". [ Para 65]  
 
v. It is clear, as is evident from the observation of the GC Chair, that members had vastly 
differing views on the issue. It lacked consensus. In the backdrop it was clarified in no 
uncertain words that the issue was only for information, and GC was not required to 
take a decision, nor could it have taken a decision taking into account the negative  
mandate. Needless to say, GC did not take any decision to start negotiations, but some  
members decided to go ahead with negotiations in utter disregard to the system and  
the architecture of the WTO.  
vi. Members engaged in negotiations on a negative mandate issue  have breached their  
own commitments made in this very forum. They are trying to do it one more time by  
altering the very framework whose custodianship lies with these members. They are 
doing it through violation of Articles III.1, III.2, IX, and X of the Marrakesh Agreement. 
Article III.1 of the WTO Agreement states that "the WTO shall facilitate the 
implementation, administration and operation and further the objectives of this 
Agreement and of the multilateral trade agreements". Article III.2 of the WTO 
Agreement stated that "the WTO shall provide a forum for negotiations among its 
Members concerning their multilateral trade relations.". Article IX and X, respectively,  
prescribe for consensus -based decision -making and amendments of the Marrakesh 
Agreement  or the Multilateral Agreements covered therein.  
vii. I will not get into the substance and will only talk about the process. As per the 
provisions of Article III.2 and Article X of the Marrakesh agreement, any new 
disciplines needing negotiation require conse nsus of all WTO members.  
viii. In respect of any new Agreement that has to become part of Annex 4 (Plurilateral  
Agreement), if such agreement falls within the scope of WTO, consensus is needed to  
start such negotiation, and consensus is needed to incorporate the  negotiated and 
agreed text to the Annex 4 in accordance with Article X of the Agreement. Slicing this  
consensus rule only to seek to incorporate an agreement into Annex 4 is illegal.  WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 161 - 
 
  ix. And the last document which I would like to quote is the document presen ted by 
Namibia, South Africa, and India, which is WT/GC/W/819/Rev.1 . In this document, we 
have explained our understanding as to why JSIs do not have any legal status.  
Members interested in IFD or any other non -mandated issue could have informa l discussions outside 
the formal structures of the WTO. However, when discussions under JSIs turn into negotiations, and 
their outcomes are sought to be formalised into the WTO framework of rules, it can only be done in 
accordance with the rules of procedu re for amendments as well as decision -making as set out in 
Article III.2, and X of the Marrakesh Agreement. Investment facilitation has a negative mandate, as 
detailed above. Hence, with this negative mandate even to start negotiation, a case for its 
forma lisation in WTO does not arise. Therefore, it is a matter of serious concern to us if the 
proponents of IFD, a JSI outcome, try to force their interests into the rule -based WTO multilateral 
system in violation of WTO Rules and the basic foundation of the M arrakesh Agreement, which 
specifically requires decision -making through consensus.  
 
In our view, the proponents of the informal process are trying to take away our treaty  embedded 
right in the consensus -based decision -making process of the WTO in their att empt to push this 
agenda. Certain members who are willing to give away this treaty embedded right in the case of IFD 
should very well be ready for a WTO future wherein members will bring issues of their interest and 
push them into WTO, even without consens us. Would the same Members now pushing for IFD 
negotiations without consensus forgo this treaty -embedded right of theirs with the same eagerness 
for issues like "Trade and Forced Labour", "Trade and Democracy", and Trade and Human Rights"? 
We have already heard the interest of some members in rulemaking in WTO on these issues. 
Similarly, we would also wish to ask here as to whether we could appoint Appellate Body members 
without a consensus, as only one member has a different view on this.  
 
Unlike other int ernational organisations, where only a few members dictate the agenda, the WTO 
provides rights to every individual member to have a say in deciding the negotiating agenda. The 
interests of the developing and LDC Members are safeguarded in the WTO and also attract them to 
join the WTO because of this crucial aspect of WTO architecture even though wide asymmetry exists 
in WTO that is against the interests of the developing and LDC members. Therefore, it is of 
paramount interest to this organisation that this treaty -embedded right is preserved and not eroded 
in the name of WTO reforms.  
 
In this background, I would like to reiterate that Investment Facilitation for Development, which 
supposedly facilitated investment, did not pertain to multilateral trade relat ions. Investment per se 
is not trade. It could or could not result in cross -border trade, which is the subject of multilateral 
trade relations. Investment covers a wide range of assets or enterprises subject to a separate 
universe of obligations. A linkage  of an issue with the trade does not empower WTO to negotiate on 
it under the aegis of multilateral trade relations. For example, certain members mentioned that 
trade, investment, and employment are all related; hence, they should be discussed.  Going with this 
logic, and also considering that employment is listed as an objective in the Marrakesh Agreement, 
would such Members be ready to discuss trade and forced labour in the WTO since 
labour/employment is also related to trade? As far as the investment aspe cts of trade are concerned, 
the Agreement on TRIMS and the GATS already deal with trade -related investment aspects in goods 
and services, respectively. The TRIMS deals with certain trade -related investment measures that 
can restrict and distort trade. The GATS dealt with the supply of services through commercial 
presence in the territory of any other Member, which was related to trade in services and not purely 
investment. None of these agreements, however, has provided the context for a general discussion 
on policies, rules and regulations surrounding investment.  
 
If we stretch the argument of the proponents that investment and trade are linked and, therefore, 
we could make rules on investment in the WTO, then we could start rulemaking in Intellectual 
Property (IP) here in the WTO, even for the non -trade related aspect of IP.  
 
India would like to reiterate again that Members interested in IFD, or any other non -mandated 
subject are entitled to take up informal discussions outside the formal structure of the  WTO.  
 
We do not have any reservations about changes, additions or deletions of WTO Treaty commitments, 
Mandates or Decisions in the WTO, but that should be done through legal means, that is, first 
amending relevant Articles. As demonstrated, the whole approach t o JSI is legally inconsistent with WT/GC/M/208  
 
- 162 - 
 
  the fundamental principles and procedures of the Marrakesh Agreement. We, therefore, do not agree 
to bring disciplines within the rule -based WTO legal framework through this illegal process.  
 
Finally, to sum up, the docum ent referred to in the communication is an outcome of an illegal process 
nurtured in a rule -based multilateral system, and therefore, we would not like it to be placed before 
the Ministers. Thank you.  
 
Item 19 - Enhancing Multilateral Deliberative Function  on Environment -related Trade 
Measures and Fostering Sustainable Development - Request from China and Colombia  
 
Chair, we thank the delegations of China and Colombia for putting this item on the agenda of the 
General Council.  
  
CTE provides dedicated forum for discussions on environment issues and this Committee is well 
mandated to have discussions on trade related issue in environment. The Committee on Trade and 
Environment remains the empowered WTO body for advancing discussions on the rela tionship 
between trade and environment.  
  
We believe that there is room for a Ministerial declaration in MC13, which highlights the importance 
of harmonizing international trade law and international environment law. In fact, the Ministers can 
go a step fu rther and decide that the CTE and other relevant WTO bodies should discuss issues vital 
to the developing countries like Transfer of Technology to find real solutions to environmental 
problems and stopping the march of unilateral, trade -restrictive measure s proliferating currently in 
their tracks.  
  
We have heard the term deliberative function this year in the context of WTO reform. However, we 
do not find the source of this term in the Marrakesh agreement. We would request more clarity on 
what the scope of  deliberative function in the context of WTO Agreements is and whether we could 
borrow it from any function that is prescribed in the agreement.  
 
 
__________