JOB/GC/158  
JOB/TNC/64  
 
28 November 2017  
(17-6481) Page: 1/3 
General Council  
Trade Negotiations Committee  Original: English  
 
 MINISTERIAL CONFEREN CE PROCESS AND OUTCO ME DOCUMENT  
 
COMMUNICATION FROM T HE AFRICAN GROUP, PL URINATIONAL STATE OF  BOLIVIA,  
THE REPUBLIC OF CUBA AND BOLIVARIAN REPUBLIC OF VENEZUEL A1 
The following communication, dated 24 November 2017, is being circulated to the General Council 
and the Trade Negotiations Committee, at the request of the delegations of the African Group, 
Plurinational State of Bolivia, the Republic of Cuba and Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela  
 
_______________  
 
1  BACKGROUND  
1.1.  Since the WTO was established in January 1995, ten Ministerial Conferences have been held 
so far. The procedures adopted, both in the preparatory process in Geneva and at the Ministerial 
Confere nce itself, have varied considerably. This uncertainty in the process makes it difficult for 
Members to adequately prepare for the conferences.  
1.2.  Recalling our past experiences of Ministerial Conferences, we reiterate the crucial importance 
of creating a tr ansparent, democratic, bottom -up, all -inclusive and consultative decision -making 
process in the WTO, as this is vital to preserving the credibility of the WTO and the multilateral 
trading system.  
1.3.  Noting the importance of agreeing to some basic principles a nd procedures in this Member -
driven organization, this communication is our contribution to guide the preparatory process prior 
to, and at Ministerial Conferences  
2  PRINCIPLE GUIDELINES   
2.1.  We reiterate the importance of taking decisions by consensus, in accord ance with paragraph 
1 of Article IX of the Marrakech Agreement Establishing the WTO, especially in the context of the 
Ministerial Conference and its preparatory phase.   
2.2.  The process leading to, during, and after the Ministerial Conference must be predictabl e, 
must reflect the guiding principles in the WTO and DDA negotiations, namely, full Member 
participation, inclusive, transparent, predictable, and bottom -up processes, with consensus -based 
Member -driven negotiations, decisions and outcomes.  
2.3.  All consultati ons should be transparent and open -ended. Where different meeting formats are 
deemed necessary or considered useful to advance the negotiating process, they should be 
representative of all configurations. It must include the main protagonists, and should i nclude the 
Coordinators of regional groupings as well as focal points, and proponent group focal points at a 
minimum. Where meetings are not open -ended, regular intervals shall be accorded to enable 
Coordinators of regional groupings and other Coordinators  and focal points  to report to their 
constituencies. Reports on all issues and progress at these meetings should be made in open -
ended meetings for the information and consideration by all Members.  
                                                
1 This submission is without prejudice to the position of Nigeria.  
 JOB/GC/158 • JOB/TNC/64  
 
- 2 - 
 
  2.4.  As per paragraph 46 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, t he overall conduct of the 
negotiations shall be supervised by the Trade Negotiations Committee under the authority of the 
General Council. As per TN/C/1, the General Council retains the overall responsibility for the 
preparations for Ministerial Conference s.  
2.5.  Noting that the preparatory processes are conducted by the relevant TNC bodies under the 
close supervision of the General Council in Geneva, any negotiating procedure to be adopted at the 
Ministerial Conference should be elaborated on and agreed to by all Members prior to the 
Ministerial Conference.  
2.6.  In the preparatory process prior to, and at the Ministerial Conference, all Chairpersons should 
be impartial and objective and ensure transparency and inclusiveness in decision -making and 
consultative proces ses, taking into account the intergovernmental and Member -driven character of 
the WTO. In their reporting to overseeing bodies, Chairpersons should reflect consensus, or where 
this has not been possible, they should clearly articulate issues, divergences a nd convergence.  
2.7.  In various meetings, formal as well as informal, in the preparatory process and during the 
Ministerial Conference, each representative may be accompanied by such alternates and advisers 
as the representative may require. The number should not be restricted given that representatives 
may require expert advice from various officials involved in the subjects.  
2.8.  The Chairman of the General Council shall have the sole responsibility of transmitting 
consensus -based texts in Geneva for multilateral decision -making to the Ministerial Conference as 
agreed and adopted by the Members at the last Council meeting. All documents should have been 
listed, agreed to by consensus and then submitted to the Ministerial Conference. All applicable 
rules and princip les of procedure must be followed.  
2.9.  A draft ministerial declaration and decisions contained in it can only be forwarded to the 
Ministerial Conference by the General Council upon consensus to do so. Language of the draft 
ministerial declaration and attached  decisions should be clear and unambiguous. The draft 
ministerial declaration and decisions should be based on consensus. Where this is not possible, 
such differences should be fully and appropriately reflected. This could be done either through 
listing va rious options suggested by Members or by the chairperson reflecting different positions 
on issues. If there is no consensus to the inclusion of any issue in the draft ministerial declaration 
or its decisions, then such an issue cannot be included in the dr aft declaration or its decisions.  
2.10.   The work on the declaration and its decisions for adoption by Ministers should be completed 
in Geneva. Only those issues, which are reflected either as options or where the chairperson has 
reflected different positions sho uld be left for the Ministers to deliberate and decide on at the 
Ministerial Conference.  
2.11.   Appointment of Minister Chairpersons or Facilitators who would conduct consultations and 
meetings on specific subjects at the Ministerial Conference, should be identified by consensus in 
the preparatory process in Geneva, through consultations among all Me mbers. Such persons 
should be from Members that do not have a direct interest in the subject assigned for 
consultations and meetings, and shall not involve Ministers who are Coordinators of regional 
groupings; or focal points on specific subject files.  
2.12.   The Ministerial Conference is the forum for decision -making. All meetings in this 
configuration should be open to all Members.  
2.13.   There should be sufficient time for delegations to consider documents to facilitate proper 
consideration by, and consultation with  the capital. Any documents to be presented for decision -
making shall be shared with all Members at least 12 hours before the Session as to enable 
sufficient consultations. Meeting/s should then be called to allow Members to express themselves 
on the text in a closed session.  
2.14.   Considering the nature of previous Ministerial Conferences, and recalling the relevance of 
TN/C/1, we stress that as far as possible, only one negotiating body should meet at the same time 
at the Ministerial Conference. The capacity a nd resource constraints of smaller delegations should 
be taken into account when scheduling meetings.  JOB/GC/158 • JOB/TNC/64  
 
- 3 - 
 
  2.15.   The duration of the MC11 should be in accordance with the schedule agreed upon in 
Geneva, as many delegations make their travel and accommodation arrange ments accordingly. 
There will be no stopping of the clock. Further, extended late night negotiating sessions should be 
avoided.   
3  PROSPECTS FOR AN MC1 1 OUTCOME DOCUMENT  
3.1.  In view of recent developments with respect to closing the process on preparing the outc ome 
document for the MC11, we present a number of questions for further reflection and guidance at 
the upcoming TNC and General Council meeting. This clarity is essential in preparing our Ministers 
adequately for the MC11.  
 Does this event foreclose any potential outcomes at the MC11?  
 
 What is the status on any potential negotiated deliverables?  
 
 What is the nature and scope of the MC11? What sort of session do we envisage to have? 
Will it be a stock -taking exercise? What w ill be the nature and form of this exercise? Shall 
Members be delivering negotiated outcomes? If yes, how does the MC11 Chair intend to 
manage the session in the limited time available?  
 
3.2.  If the MC11 considers a Chair’s statement or summary of the meeting, Members should begin 
to assess what the contours of that statement will be.  
3.3.  No outcome document shall be imposed on Members on a take it or leave it basis. We stress 
that this process has to be fully predictable, bottom -up, inclusive, and transparent. Members shall 
not only be sufficiently consulted, but they shall also be provided with adequate notice on the 
nature and content of the outcome document.  
3.4.  Irrespective of the form of the outcome document, it shall reflect the following elements:  
 The importan ce of a rules -based, fair and equitable Multilateral Trading System as 
enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement;  
 The centrality of development in the work of the WTO;  
 
 The need to conclude the remaining elements of the Doha Development Agenda;  
 
 The critical i mportance of implementing all decisions adopted by Ministers and the General 
Council.  
 
3.5.  The centrality of development in the WTO, is the raison d'être  of our Membership. Indeed, we 
expect that development, in particular Special and Differential Treatment provisions, remain at the 
core of both existing and future WTO Agreements. This is crucial, in order to adequately address 
the economic needs of weak e conomies for their effective integration in the Multilateral Trading 
System.  
__________