TN/IP/30  
 
15 November  2021 
(21-8642) 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.  I present this report on my own responsibility and without prejudice to the position of delegations 
or to the outcome of negotiations on the negotiations on the establishment of a multilateral system 
of notification and registration of geographical indications (GIs) for wines a nd spirits ( "GI Register ") 
in the Special Session of the Council for TRIPS . 
2.  My predecessor, Ambassador Dacio Castillo (Honduras), and myself held many informal 
consultation s and open -ended meetings  over the past three years,  to gather delegations ' thoughts  
and suggestions on how to fulfil the mandate of the Special Session.  I must conclude from these 
that there has been very little or no evolution in Members ' positions on  either substantive or 
procedural issues on the GI register negotiations .  
3.  There were m any new developments outside the WTO, including multilateral , bilateral and 
regional agreements,  and domestic systems on GI protection . Some delegations supporting the 
modalities  proposal contained in document TN/C/W/52 indicated their readiness and willingness to 
participate in sharing information and experiences  arising from  these developments.  In their view, 
this information sharing exercise was important for suggesting possible new avenues for future 
negotiations in the GI register n egotiations . Other delegations  in this group , however,  were still 
sceptical of its benefit to the Special Session 's work.  
4.  The delegation s supporting t he Joint Proposal contained in document TN/IP/W/10/Rev.4 thought 
that this information exchange would dup licate work in the WIPO Standing Committee on the Law 
of Trademarks, Industrial Designs and Geographical Indications ( "SCT"), and that the SCT was an 
appropriate and already available forum for this type of exchange . They sought further clarification 
on wh at the proponent s wanted to achieve through this exercise.  
5.  On procedural matters to do with substance of the negotiations , the W52 Group stood by their 
proposal for linkage and parallelism between the three TRIPS issues  addressed in document 
TN/C/W/52, namely GI register, GI extension, and TRIPS -CBD. In response, a  delegation from the 
Joint Proposal Group repeated that respect for the Special Session 's mandate was a threshold issue 
to be addressed  before negotiations cou ld recommence.  
6.  I have repeatedly suggested that  delegations reflect on how, when and where they may address 
the other side 's concern s without  necessarily conceding  or agreeing to them . I also asked that they  
reflect on new approaches to achieve their own objectives . Despite this encouragement, to my 
knowledge n one of the delegations has engaged with the other side on  these specific suggestion s, 
and no novel ideas were put forward  on how to advance the work of the Special Session.   
7.  Since my last written rep ort, circulated as document TN/IP/29 on 25 February 2021, I had 
planned to call for a small group consultation to explore the possibility of holding the suggested 
information exchange exercise, and then to hold an informal open -ended meeting to report on t hese 
consultations and to provide an opportunity for delegations to share their new thoughts on the work 
of the Special Session . Delegations  did not see  the current negotiating environment as conducive to 
any substantive engagement . Most of the principal  delegations, including proponents , considered TN/IP/30  
 
- 2 - 
 
  the negotiations and preparations for MC12 to be a much higher priority,  and thus felt there was no 
urgency in this regard.   
8.  After reflecting the overall situation, I find no appetite now to take up the negotiations in the 
TRIPS Special Session , including among the main demandeurs . Delegations ' willingness to engage 
substantively in the TRIPS Special Session is likely to remain scant , at least until after MC12 . Even 
then, s ignificant efforts will be neces sary on the part of all delegations to overcome persistent 
disagreements on the mandate and the substance of these negotiations.   
__________