TN/IP/28  
 
15 December 2020  
(20-9096) Page: 1/2 
Council for Trade -Related Aspects of  
Intellectual Property Rights  
Special Session    
 
MULTILATERAL SYSTEM OF NOTIFICATION AND REGISTRATION OF GEOGRAPHICAL 
INDICATIONS FOR WINES AND SPIRITS  
 
REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN, AMBASSADOR ALFREDO SUESCUM (PANAMA)  
1.  This report on the negotiations on the establishment of a multilateral system of notification and 
registration of geographical indications (GIs) for wines and spirits ("GI register") in the 
Special  Session of the Council for TRIPS is submitted on my own re sponsibility and is without 
prejudice to the positions of delegations and to the outcome of the negotiations.  
2.  Since my appointment as Chair  of the TRIPS Council in Special Session in July 2020 , I held 
informal consultations with ten interested delegations to canvass their thoughts and suggestions on 
how the Special Session could proceed in fulfilling its mandate , as set out in the first sentence of 
paragraph 18 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration ( document WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1), which reads as 
follows: "With a view to completing the work started in the Council for Trade -Related Aspects of 
Intellectual Property Rights (Council for TRIPS) on the implementation of Article 23.4, we agree to 
negotiate the establishment of a multilateral system of notification and reg istration of geographical 
indications for wines and spirits by the Fifth Session of the Ministerial Conference."   
3.  These ten delegations were mainly from either the W52 Group or the Joint Proposal Group.  In 
essence, the W52 Group proposed to establish a reg ister system under which once a GI is registered, 
there would be a rebuttable presumption in all Members that the GI is eligible for protection. On the 
other hand, the Joint Proposal Group advocated to set up a voluntary database for registered GIs, 
which would be consulted by Members in their decisions on GI protection.  
4.  In these consultations, I invited the delegations to share their views on two specific questions: 
(1) are there any changes in their delegations' positions? If not, what steps would they propose to 
take in fulfilling the negotiating mandate? (2) how do recent developments in multilateral, bilateral 
and regional agreements and in domestic GI protection systems bear on the work of the Spe cial 
Session?  
5.  In response to the first question, all delegations indicated that their positions remained 
unchanged. The delegations from the W52 Group continued to emphasise the importance they 
attached to  the GI register and the linkage and parallelism am ong the issues of GI register , GI 
extension, and the relationship between TRIPS and the CBD . The Joint Proposal Group reiterated 
that the Special Session's mandate should be strictly limited to the GI register for wines and spirits. 
The delegations general ly indicat ed their readiness and willingness to reflect on new approaches to 
reinvigorate the work of the Special Session and fulfil its mandate. However, most of the delegations 
made no concrete proposals on next steps.  None suggested new approaches.  
6.  Responding to the second question, the delegations concurred that there were many new 
developments outside the WTO, including multilateral, bilateral and regional agreements regarding 
GI protection.  There were suggestions that the Special Session schedule meet ings to share 
information and experiences; that the WTO Secretariat conduct a study on the relationship between 
the TRIPS Agreement and the Geneva Act of the Lisbon System ; and that the WIPO Secretariat be 
invited to brief on the state of play in the WIPO international registration system.  TN/IP/28  
 
- 2 - 
 
  7.  However, some delegations remained to be convinced that such information sharing exercises 
were an appropriate or useful step.  Other delegations indicated that developments outside the WTO 
did not necessarily have a bear ing on the work of the Special Session, as the Special Session had 
its own mandate. Concerns were also raised on whether the Special Session was an appropriate 
forum for such information sharing, given the nature of the Special Session as a negotiating bod y.  
8.  On 22 October  2020, I held an informal open -ended meeting to report the whole membership on 
those consultations . I also shared with delegations my sense of the current situation that while there 
was a common desire to fulfil the existing mandate, the positions and creativity of delegations in 
these negotiations had not changed . No comments were made at the meeting.  
9.  Regarding next steps, I will hold consultations with individual interested Members in early 2021, 
and will invite delegations to share their views on the three suggestions : that the Special Session 
schedule meetings to share information and experiences  on the diverse ways in which GIs have been 
protected through bilateral and/or reginal agreements ; that the WTO Secr etariat conduct a study on 
the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Geneva Act of the Lisbon System ; and that 
the WIPO Secretariat be invited to brief on the state of play with the WIPO international registration 
system. In order to r esume the substantive work  on the GI register , I will also invite delegations to 
reflect on how , when or where the other side's concerns  might be addressed  without necessarily 
conceding nor agreeing to them , and to reflect on new approaches to achieve their objectiv es. 
 
__________