RESTRICTED  
  
G/C/M/139/Add.1  
 
21 October  2021 
(21-7963) Page: 1/4 
Council for Trade in Goods    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETING OF THE COUNCIL FOR TRADE IN GOODS  
31 MARCH AND 1  APRIL  2021 
CHAIRPERSON: HE MR LUNDEG PUREVSUREN  
Addendum  
In a communication dated 23 July 2021, the Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Goods (CTG) , 
HE Mr Lundeg Purevsuren (Mongolia) , announced that the CTG would reconvene on 2 6 July 2021 
the meeting that had been suspended on 31  March  and 1 April 20211, with the purpose  of addressing  
Agenda  Item 3, "Appointment of Officers to the Subsidiary Bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods" . 
 
3. APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS TO THE SUBSIDIARY BODIES OF THE COUNCIL FOR 
TRADE IN GOODS  
3.1.  The Chairperson  recalled that, at the CTG  meeting of 31  March  and 1  April 2021, Agenda 
Item 3 on the Appointment of Officers to  the Subsidiary Bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods 
had been  suspended until further notice pending the consultations of the outgoing Chairperson of 
the CTG. I t had also been agreed that the former CTG  Chairperson , Ambassador Mikael Anz én 
(Sweden) , would hold further consultations on this matter.  
3.2.  On 23  June 2021, Ambassador Anzén  had sent a communication to the Regional Group 
Coordinators indicating that, despite his numerous meetings and consultations , it had not been 
possible to reach agreement on a slate of names, and that two  Group Coordinators had 
recommended that he request the Chairperson of the General Council, Ambassador Dacio Castillo 
(Honduras) to seek a solution to the current impasse. Ambassador Anz én had made this request 
and Ambassador Castillo had accepted to oversee the process.  On 2 July 2021, after consulting with 
the Regional Group Coordinators, Ambassador Castillo had sent a communication informing Members 
that the Group Coordinators had reached an agreement . In the same communication, he had 
transmitted the agreed slate of names to Members for their consideration.  
3.3.  As part of Ambassador Castillo's consultations, a further understanding had been  reached, 
namely, that the CTG and CTS  Chairs would undertake  consultations on the overall exercise of the 
appointment of officers to avoid a repeat of such a situation in the future. Furthermore, Ambassador 
Castillo  had noted that there had been  an additional understanding regarding the allocation of 
chairpersonships for 2022, and that he would inform the succeeding General Council Chair  
accordingly . Finally, he had noted that it had been an extremely difficult process and that the 
proposed slate of names  had reflected a very delicate balance. For this reason, he had requested 
Members' collaboration and utmost flexibility with a view to adopting the slate and allowing the 
14 subsidiary bodies to continue operating normally in the coming months.  
3.4.  On 7 July 2021, Ambassador Castillo  had sent a second  communication , noting that it had been 
brought to his attention that additional time was needed for further consultations , and that, a s a 
result, the issue of the appointment of officers would remain suspended to allow those  consultations 
to take place. He  had further indicated that the item would be resumed at the appropriate moment 
by the CTG  Chair.  
 
1 See documents  WTO/AIR/CTG/1 8 and G/C/W/7 93. G/C/M/139/Add.1  
 
- 2 - 
 
  3.5.  On 14  July 2021, Ambassador Castillo  had held another meeting with Group Coordinators , but 
agreement had still not been possible.  That same evening, the CTG  Chairperson had reconvened an 
informal CTG  meeting with the objective of reporting on the situation , although it was then drawn  
to his attention that further consultations were needed. Ambassador Castillo had followed up with 
additional consultations with Group Coordinators on 22   and 26  July but, unfortunately, it had still 
not been possible to reach  consensus on a slate of names . In a communication dated 23  July 2021, 
the CTG  Chairperson had also informed the Membership that the EU  member State nominee 
nominated to chair the Committee on TRIMs, Mr  Tamás Vattai (Hungary), was in the process of 
moving jobs  and would no longer be available to chair the Committee for which he had been 
nominated. In consequence, the EU  member State s had nominated  Ms Vilma Peltonen (Finland)  to 
chair the Committee on TRIMs.  
3.6.  The CTG Chair had also drawn Members' attention to the  fact that there were already 
two subsidiary bodies , the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Import Licensing , that 
lacked a Chairperson. He warned that Members ran  a high risk of facing serious organizational 
problems regarding regular committee  work as a result of this situation. Furthermore, the  problem 
had been  compounded by it being a ministerial year.  
3.7.  Immediately preceding the Council's resumed formal meeting, the CTG Chair had held an 
informal meeting , as required by Rule  7.3 of the Guidelines for Appointment of Officers to 
WTO Bodies (WT/L/510), where he had reported to Members on the process that had been held until 
that moment to reach consensus on a slate of names for the CTG's subsidiary bodies. Un fortunately, 
Members had not been able to reach consensus . Several Members  also took  the floor at this informal 
meeting to  comment  on this unfortunate situation , and the Chair had given those delegations the 
opportunity at the Council's formal meeting either to take the floor again or else to request that their 
statement made during the informal meeting be reflected in the minutes . In terms of next steps, 
the CTG Chair's intention was to report on this matter to the General Council at its meeting of the 
following day, and to conclude Agenda Item 3. 
3.8.  The representative of Chile, speaking on behalf of the GRULAC, stated the following:  
3.9.  The GRULAC appreciates the efforts made by the CTG and General Council Chairs to facilitate 
a speedy resolution to the issue  of chairpersons . Nevertheless, the GRULAC regrets that Members 
have not been able to find a solution to this issue. As Members know, the GRULAC presented 
three  candidatures for this process, and only two were reflected in the current slate. Nevertheless, 
members of the GRULAC are  of the view that they can  live with this slate in the spirit of compromise. 
The GRULAC  expect s others to show the same spirit of compromise.  The GRULAC  made a sacrifice 
last year to step back from chairing the TBT  Committee. This w as done as the GRULAC's  genuine 
contribution to resolving the impasse in last year's  appointment s process. In turn, it was agreed and 
understood that GRULAC would, therefore, take up the TBT  chairpersonship this year.  
3.10.  The current slate of chairpersonships includes two  GRULAC  candidates , for the TBT and 
Agriculture Committee s, who are excellent candidates and extremely experienced in their fields ; 
they are also known among their peers by virtue of the quality of their in terventions and their active 
and constructive participation in those committee meetings.  Members  have spent several months 
on this "housekeeping " issue, which affects the functioning of the WTO  bodies and the credibility of 
the Organization as a forum to g enerate consensus. The GRULAC  believe s that it is time for the WTO 
to move on to more pressing matters, especially in the middle of a pandemic and Ministerial year.  
3.11.  The GRULAC  calls on the delegation of India to show flexibility and constructiveness in thi s 
process. The GRULAC  understand s that India is the only Member not joining the consensus to solve 
this procedural issue. Finally, the instructions made by the General Council Chair to the Chairperson  
of the CTG and the Chairperson of the CTS to find crite ria to avoid this situation in future processes 
goes in the right direction. The GRULAC  region will contribute constructively to this process and 
expect s others to do the same.  
3.12.  The representative of the Russian Federation  stated the following:  
3.13.  The Russian Federation observes the unprecedentedly low level of transparency in this year 's 
nomination s process for  Chairs of the subsidiary bodies of the CTG. This is a matter of substantial 
concern for Russia . The Russian Federation would like to ask two questions.  First, Russia  would like G/C/M/139/Add.1  
 
- 3 - 
 
  to refer to the GC  Chair's letter of 2 July mentioning some "additional understanding for the 
2022 allocation of chairmanships of subsidiary bodies ". For the sake of transparency, Russia  
suggest s that the Chair  let us know  the details of that "understanding " or, otherwise, to confirm that 
such an understanding does  not exist.  Russia had partially understood the answer to this question  
based on the statements that were made by Latin American delegations during the informal m eeting ; 
nevertheless, Russia considers that the information should be provided. Such understandings or 
agreements were  not visible , which was probably one of the reasons for the problem now being 
faced. The problem is that such understandings are not formally foreseen by the enacted Guidelines 
for the Appointment of Officers to WTO  Bodies ; furthermore, they are made in a non -transparent 
manner, which creates problems for all . Second, in the same letter , the GC Chair informed Memb ers 
that he had instructed the CTG  Chair, together with the CTS  Chair, to launch consultations with 
interested Members aimed at making improvement s to the nomination procedure. When do es the 
Chair plan to launch those consultations?  Finally, independently of the outcome of this process, 
Members face a serious systemic problem , and the Russian Federation is  looking forward to the 
discussion  at the forthcoming meeting  of the General Council , including the proposal to launch 
consultation s on clarifying the rul es of procedure . 
3.14.  The representative of India stated the following:  
3.15.  India thanks  the Chairperson for his explanation of the process  that was followed . India has 
conveyed its concerns, both with respect to the specific committee for which India is interested and 
also the overall selection process,  to our interlocutors, namely the  AGDC  Chair, the outgoing 
CTG Chair, and the GC  Chair, on various occasions. These concerns have never been addressed, and 
sometimes not communicated to the relevant interlo cutors, which only created more confusion and 
frustration am ong Members. Therefore, India's delegation is not in a position to accept the proposed 
slate of names for the CTG subsidiary bodies.  
3.16.  India is concerned that , due to the deficiencies in the current  selection process  system , 
Members  are likely to be in the same situation in the coming years. Therefore, India believes that it 
is high time that Members  fix the problem by putting in place a robust system to avoid the recurrence 
of this scenario in the f uture. Therefore, at the following day's  General Council meeting, India would 
be making a statement on this issue that would  highlight the shortcomings of the current system 
and offer India's  suggestion s to strengthen it. Therefore, India request s patience from Members as 
well as their attention to the discussion on this issue at the G eneral Council 's meeting the following 
day. 
3.17.  Regarding the proposal that Mexico take over the Chairpersonship  this year , and India next 
year, India would like to state that India's  concerns have been about the systemic issue concerning 
the process and India believe s that this impasse has brought to everyone 's attention the urgent 
need to address the problems in the process tha t exists presently. Taking into consideration that 
only four to five  months are left of this year , India will be happy to accept the Chairpersonship  of 
the TBT Committee this year and the same can be offered to Mexico for the full year next year.  India 
would also like to reiterate that the issue will be discussed at the General Council 's meeting the 
following day . 
3.18.  The representative of the Philippines  stated the following:  
3.19.  The Philippines is concern ed for the system and encourage s further consultations among 
regional coordinators and Members. is the Philippines  also express es its support for improving the 
chair selection process. At the same time, the Philippines would like to ask the Chair whether the re 
are any rules in place , should consensus fail, for calling in voting, and whether this has been 
considered in the consultations. The Philippines understands that , under the General Council rules, 
which are applicable to the various committees, there is also a default rule for voting , and hopefully 
this can be discussed with the General Council Chair in order to ensure that the system continues to 
function.  G/C/M/139/Add.1  
 
- 4 - 
 
  3.20.  The Chairperson  announced  that the discussions under Agenda Item 3 had been  concluded .2 
3.21.  The meetin g was closed . 
__________  
 
 
 
2 The General Council agreed on a slate of names of the CTG  subsidiary bodies at its meeting of 
27-28 July 2021. See document  WT/GC/M/192, para graphs  22.1-22.31.