RESTRICTED  
  
WT/GC/M/175  
 
20 February 2019  
(19-0991) Page: 1/115 
General Council  
12 December 2018    
 
MINUTES OF THE MEETI NG 
HELD IN THE CENTRE W ILLIAM RAPPARD ON 12 DECEMBER  2018 
Chairperson : Mr. Junichi I hara (Japan ) 
The Chairman and the Direct or-General bade farewell to  Ms Irene Young (Hong Kong, China), 
Ambassador Juan Aguirre (Paraguay), Ambassador Francisco Lima (El Salvador) and the 23rd Chairman 
of the WTO General Council – Ambassador Xavier Carim (South Africa) , and expressed appreciation 
for their  valuable cont ributi on during their time as Permanent Representative s. The representative of 
South Africa  then made a statement on behalf of Ambassador Carim.  
 
In adopting the agenda, the General Council agreed to defer consideration of the 2018 Annua l Report 
on Accession (It em 6 under  the Proposed Agenda) to a later stage.  
 
Subjects discussed1: 
 
1   REPORT BY THE CH AIRMAN OF THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITT EE AND 
REPORT BY THE DIRECT OR-GENERAL  ................................ ................................ ...............  3 
2   IMPLEMENTATION O F THE BALI, NAIROBI AND BUENOS AIRES OUT COMES  – 
STATEMENT BY THE CHA IRMAN  ................................ ................................ ........................  7 
3   WORK PROGRAMME O N SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRM AN OF 
THE DEDICATED SESSIO N OF THE COMMITTEE O N TRADE AND DEVELOPM ENT ................  9 
4   WORK PROGRAMME O N ELECTRONIC COMMERC E – REVIEW OF PROGRE SS ...............  11 
5   THE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE ASPECTS O F COTTON – STATEMENT  BY THE 
DIRECTOR -GENERAL  ................................ ................................ ................................ ....... 15 
6   APPELLATE BODY A PPOINTMENTS – AMENDM ENTS OF THE DISPUTE 
SETTLEME NT UNDERSTANDING  ................................ ................................ ......................  18 
6.1   Statement by the European Union, China, Canada, Norway, New Zealand, 
Switzerland, Australia, Republic of Korea , Iceland, Singapore, Mexico, Costa Rica And 
Montenegro  ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  18 
6.2   Communication from the European Union, China, Canada, India, Norway, New  
Zealand, Switzerland, Australia, Republic of Korea, Iceland, Singapore, Mexico, Costa Rica 
and Montenegro  ................................ ................................ ................................ .................  18 
6.3   Communication from t he European Union, China, India and Montenegro  ...........................  18 
7   TARGETED DISCUSS IONS ON DISPUTE SETT LEMENT ISSUES – 
COMMUNICATION FROM A USTRALIA, SINGAPORE AND COSTA RICA  ..............................  41 
8   ANNUAL REVIEW OF  THE SPECIAL COMPULS ORY LICENSING SYSTEM  – 
PARAGRAPH 7 OF THE A NNEX TO THE AMENDED TRIPS  AGREEMENT AND 
PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE D ECISION ON THE IMPLE MENTATION OF PARAGRA PH 6 OF 
THE DOHA DECLARATION  ON THE TR IPS AGREEMENT AND PU BLIC HEALTH  – 
REPORT OF THE COUNCI L FOR TRIPS ................................ ................................ ..............  44 
                                                
1 The proposed agenda was ci rculated in document WT/GC/W/755 . WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 2 - 
 
  9   WAIVERS UNDER AR TICLE IX OF THE WTO AGREEMENT  ................................ ............  44 
9.1   Introduction of Harmonized Syste m 2002 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision  ................................ ................................ ...............................  44 
9.2   Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision  ................................ ................................ ...............................  44 
9.3   Introduction of Harmonized System 2012 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tarif f 
Concessions – Draft Decision  ................................ ................................ ...............................  44 
9.4   Introduction of Harmonized System 2017 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision  ................................ ................................ ...............................  45 
9.5   Review of Waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement  ................................ ... 45 
9.5.1    Preferential Treatment in favour of Services and Service Suppliers of Least 
Developed Countries, granted on 17 December 2011 until 31 December 2030  ...........................  45 
9.5.2    Cuba – Article XV:6 – Extension of waiver, granted on 7 December 2016 until  
31 December 2021  ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  45 
9.5.3    European Union – Application of Autonomous Preferential Treatment to the Western 
Balkans, granted on 7 December 2016 until 31 December 2021  ................................ ..............  45 
9.5.4    United States – African Growth and Opportunity Act, granted on 30 November 2015 
until 30 September 2025   ................................ ................................ ................................ ... 45 
9.5.5    United States – Former Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands, granted on  
7 December 2016 until 31 December 2026 ................................ ................................ ............  45 
9.5.6    United States – Trade Preferences granted to Nepal, granted on 7 December 2016 
until 31 December 2025 (WT/L/1001, WT/L/1047)  ................................ ................................ . 45 
10   COMMITTEE ON BU DGET, FINANCE AND AD MINISTRATION – REPOR T ON 
MEETINGS OF JULY, SE PTEMBER AND NOVEMBER  2018   ................................ .................  46 
11   INTERNATIONAL T RADE CENTRE UNCTAD/W TO – REPORT OF THE J OINT 
ADVISORY GROUP ON IT S 52ND SESSION  ................................ ................................ ...... 47 
12   REVIEW OF WTO A CTIVITIES  ................................ ................................ ...................  49 
12.1   General Council, Dispute Settlement Body, and Trade Policy Review Body  ......................  49 
12.2   Sectoral Councils  and Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade, Committee on 
Agriculture, and Committee on Customs Valuation  ................................ ................................ . 49 
12.3   Committees on Trade and Development, Trade and Environment, Balance -of-
Payments Restrictions, Budget, Finance and Administration, and Regional Trade 
Agreements ................................ ................................ ................................ .......................  49 
12.4   Working Groups on Trade, Debt and Finance and Trade and Transfer of Technology  ..........  49 
12.5   Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements  ................................ ....................  49 
13   APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS TO WTO BODI ES – ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE 
CHAIRMAN PURSUANT TO  PARAGRAPH 7.1(A) OF  THE GUIDELINES  ..............................  49 
14   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 50 
14.1   G20 W ork on Trade and Investment – Statement b y Argentina ................................ ....... 50 
14.2   Chairmanship of the Working Parties on the Accession of Ethiopia and Sudan – 
Statement by t he Chairman  ................................ ................................ ................................  51 
14.3   Statement by the Chairman in connection with Administrative Measures for Members 
in Arrears  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..........................  51 
ANNEX 1 – THE REPORT S BY THE  DIRECTOR -GENERAL AN D THE CHAIRS OF THE 
NEGOTIATING GROUPS A T THE INFORMAL TNC A ND INFORMAL HODS MEE TINGS 
HELD ON 10 DECEMBER 2018  ................................ ................................ ..........................  53 
ANNEX 2 – STATEMENTS B Y MEMBERS AT THE INF ORMAL TNC AND INFORM AL 
HODS MEETINGS HELD O N 10 DECEMBER 2018  ................................ ..............................  59 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 3 - 
 
  1  REPORT BY THE CHAIRM AN OF THE TRADE NEGO TIATIONS COMMITTEE AND REPORT BY 
THE DIRECTOR -GENERAL  
1.1.  The Chairman  recalled that the D irector -General had convened Informal TNC and  Informal Heads 
of Delegation meeting s on 10 December where he had provided a report on his recent activities and 
consultations. The Chairs of N egotiating Bodies had also provided their reports on the negotiating work 
where updates had been available and forty -six delegations had taken the floor.  
1.2.   As had been announced at that meeting, the Director -General's report and the reports of the 
Chairs of  Negotiating Bodies would be included in the minutes of the General Council meeting.2  
Statements delivered by delegations would also be included in the minutes under the current item 
unless indicated otherwise.3  
1.3.  The representative of Paraguay  was pleased  that some discussions we re moving forward and 
hoped that Members continue d to engage constructively in the upc oming 18 months so that they could  
achieve meaningful results at the next Ministerial Confe rence in Astana. Paraguay  stressed the 
importance of M embers'  efforts to t ackle the systemic issues that we re threatening the  WTO's  survival . 
Members should recognise the need to depart from entrenched positions and steer the WTO to safe 
harbour. The WTO should remain relevant and all Members had a role to pl ay in strengthening a 
multilateral system that had delivered predictability and stability in global trade for seven decades.  
1.4.  Paraguay  reiterate d its deepest concern regarding the current situation of the Appellate Body. 
Members need ed to find a negotiated solution to resolve the impasse in filling all vacancies and restore 
the Appellate Body to its full capaci ty. The Appellate Body needed  to be operational for the multilateral  
system to survive. In that  regard, Paraguay welcomed  all proposals presented by Members i n their 
attempts to address the issue. To avoid paralysing the  system, strong political will would be needed 
from all Members .  
1.5.  Paraguay also stressed the importance of engaging and producing meaningful results in re levant 
disciplines. In particular, Paraguay had  always strived  to attain key deliverables in agriculture – a 
highly  protected sector where most trade distortion s occurred.  Success in agricultural reform was 
therefore imperative . In that  regard, Paraguay had  put forward and had supported several clinical 
papers throughout the year with the aim  of improving the discussions and taking them forward. 
Paraguay remained ready to engage and was pleased to see that Members would be shifting  gears at 
the beginning of 2019  under the new format prop osed by the CoA SS Chair and accepted by all 
Members. Paraguay support ed the CoA SS Chair's efforts in that regard and hoped the new format 
would drive the discussions towards a  meaningful outcome in MC12 – which should  come from a 
compromise that included  both the domestic support and the mar ket access negotiating pillars since 
the time for standalone outcomes was already over.  
1.6.  Priorities and concerns of landlocked developing countries should also find the proper synergy 
within the WTO's agenda. To overcome some of the disadvantages of its geographical position as an 
LLDC, Paraguay remained  strongly committed to the TFA implementation  which would come hand in 
hand with actions directed to overcome the infrastructure gap and lack of connectivity LLDCs 
confront ed. Paraguay  encourage d the Secretariat dealing with the TFA Facility to keep cooperating 
with them to achieve sustainable funding and support from donors and like -minded Members.  
1.7.  The WTO should also reconcile with the fact that Members should  pursue the unfinished business 
of the Doha Round while still creating new rules for th e 21st Century. In that regard, Paraguay  
                                                
2 The Director -General's report (also circulated in JOB/TNC/72) and the reports of the Chairs of Negotiating 
Bodies at the 10 December  Informal  TNC and Informal HODs Meetings  are incorporated in the minutes of this 
meeting and are  reproduced in Annex 1  of this document.  
3 The statements at the 10 December  Informal TNC and Informal HODs Meeting s by the following 
delegations are incorporated in the minutes of this meeting and can be found in Annex 2 of this document:  Canada; 
Central African Republic (LDCs); Iceland (Trade I mpact Working Group); Singapore (ASEAN); Colombia (Structured 
Discussions on Investment Facilitation for Development); South Africa (African Group); Australia (Joint Statement 
Initiative on E -Commerce); Vanuatu (ACP); European Union; Uruguay (Informal Work ing Group on MSMEs); China; 
Benin (C -4); Panama (Article XII Members); Switzerland; Brazil; Sri Lanka; Angola; Russian Federation; Republic 
of Korea; Mexico; Japan; Indonesia (G -33); India; Argentina; Chinese Taipei; Uganda; Philippines; Jamaica; 
Senegal; Norway; Chile; Turkey; Peru; Kenya; Hong Kong, China; Nigeria; Cambodia; Thailand; Costa Rica; 
Pakistan; Trinidad and Tobago; Viet Nam; Haiti (CARICOM); Papua New Guinea (Pacific Group); St. Lucia (OECS) 
and Dominican Republic.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 4 - 
 
  welcome d the progress made in discussions within the Joint Declarations on E -Commerce and on 
Investment Facilit ation and the Work Programme on  MSMEs and  thank ed the respective coordinators 
for their hard wor k throughout the year. Those  discussions had been fruitful – paving the way for a 
clear roadmap on key deliverables on e -commerce, investment facilitation and MSME s. E-Commerce 
was the future of trade and a tool to maximise t rade facilitation, integrate MSMEs  to the global value 
chains and empower women and innovation. In 2018, Members had  made tremendous progress in 
the exploratory discussions in this area . They sh ould not waste the opportunity  to prove that the WTO 
remained  relevant in constructive and mea ningful rule -making. All Members should embrace the task 
of designing new rules that governed e -commerce and should guarantee an ambitious multilateral 
result and  inclusive trade for all players including MSMEs and women. For its part, Paraguay was ready 
to move forward to the next phase of negotiations.  
1.8.  Paraguay wanted  to see a more functional and stronger WTO – one tha t produce d and deliver ed 
better results and ensure d that international trade flowed as smoothly, pr edictably and freely as 
possible . 
1.9.  On a personal note, as it was his last General Council meeting, he said  that it had  been an 
amazing six years in Gen eva working alongside all Members  in striving for a more open trade 
environment that could bring prosperity to all. He  thank ed them for their hard work in their common 
quest to achieve that goal. As the WTO wa s a Member -driven , powerful motor for free trade , he asked 
Members to drive i t not like a tractor b ut like a McLaren race car that would take them  to the future.   
1.10.   The representative of Barbados  thanked  the Director -General for the re port on his activities 
since their  last meeting and the Chairs of the negotiating bodies for their updates in the respect ive 
negotiating processes.  As an en gine for growth and development, trade was important  for open, small 
island  developing states (SIDS) that we re challenged by the impacts of smallness and vulnerability.  
Barbados had been and continued to be  a staunch beli ever in the rules -based multilateral trading 
system – recognising that even though i t was not perfect, multilateralism wa s still the best course for 
small , vulnerable countries. Barbados  therefore place d great importance on an open, transparent and 
inclusive rules -based multila teral system that not only sought  to fully integrate countries lik e it into 
global trade but was also seen to do so. In that  regard , Barbados  reiterate d its concern with the 
challenges confronting multilateralism and by extensi on, the multilateral trading system as e mbodied 
in the WTO.  As had  been n oted, the rise of protectionism,  increased tendency towards nationalis m, 
the inability of the WTO to appoin t members to the Appellate Body  and the struggle f or global geo -
political ba lance present ed systemic challenges to the rules -based multilateral trading system.   
1.11.   Since the Director -General's last report, those who had  expressed the need t o reform or 
modernise the WTO had  intensif ied their discourse. Although some elements which ha d been classified 
by some Members as ripe for inclusion un der the ambit of WTO Reform had  been discussed in regular 
bodies, broader d iscussions under WTO Reform had  been limited to small group discussion and entities 
outside of the WTO. I f Members we re to agree to enter into multilateral discussions  on WTO Reform, 
discussions should  be open, inclusive, transparent and include the interests put forward by all Members  
and not just a few.  
1.12.   Barbados also took note that the world had  changed since the establishme nt of the WTO s ome 
two decades ago. That change had  not however been equitable across all Members. In fact, many 
developing countries, p articularly LDCs and SVEs, we re yet to be fully integrated into the global trading 
system. Any deliberation  should  there fore take into account the peculiar characteristics and 
circumstances of, and allow adequate flexibilities for small, vulnerable island states  aimed at leaving 
no one behind.  
1.13.   Regarding  the core work, Barbados continued  to be concerned about the impasse in the 
selection pro cess for  Appellate Body members as it recognis ed the important role that the dispute 
settlement mechanism pl ayed in setting this House apart. It also served  as a timely reminder that its 
rules-based nature and  the enforcement of those  rules was one o f the core reasons why many 
Members had beco me founding Members of , or acceded to the WTO itself. Barbados therefore urged  
Members to exercise the necessary political will to urgently fill the v acancies in the Appellate Body.  
The viability of th e WTO as a  rules-based institution depended  on it.  
1.14.   As Members sought to progress their work in the WTO, Barbados  was not opposed to 
deliberative  engagement on matters that had a positive bearing on its  economic and trade WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 5 - 
 
  circumstan ces. It was only when they had  a clear understanding of each other' s interests , through 
dialogue, that they would be more  able to chart a path t owards the common ground that they all had 
to achieve if they were to forge a shared agenda. Barbados  therefore remain ed convinced tha t such 
an approach could effect a "win -win" outcome for all in each of the deliberative aspects of the WTO.  
1.15.   Barbados support ed the statements made  by Haiti on behalf of the CARICOM Group in Geneva, 
Vanuatu on behalf of the ACP Group and Indonesia on behalf  of the G -33. 
1.16.   The representative of the Republic of Moldova  noted that there was a unique opportunity that 
should not be waste d. Winston Churchill had  been right in saying  "never  let a good crisis go to waste ". 
Members should live up to the challenges of t he times by  seizing all opportunities . In that  regard, a 
certain level of flexibility would be  needed  to move forward and not risk sliding backwards and 
breaking. A new thinking or a proc ess of a new deal for the WTO was needed. Repeating old  statements 
would not suffice. Members should prioritise preserving the b asic principles  of the WTO  and should 
keep the connection  with development. Every Member should make an  effort to get involved in that 
process of re -thinking and re-shaping the system because they were all part of it – making  all of them 
responsible for their joint success to ensure their  further coexistence.  
1.17.   Moldova thank ed all delegations for the substantial and well -informed exchange of views that 
it had  witnessed at the TNC meeting and for the s erious and committed engagement at the current 
General Council meeting which reinforced  the importance  and the primacy of the WTO in the world of 
multilateral trade.  
1.18.   Many delegations had  underlined the urgency of reform. It woul d be fair to say that most 
Members  share d that  view. The question was: in which way and how rapid could  they complete the  
reform in a transparent manner?  Predictability should remain the  basic principle of th e WTO no matter 
how tough it got  to ensure it s viability in the complex sys tem of international trade . The lack of it in 
such an  institution as the WTO could send  a negative message to the private sector and business. 
Economic agents and trade actors need ed a clear reinforcement of the principles of inclusiveness, 
transparency a nd predictability from all Members.  
1.19.   The principle of achieving a balanced outcome should guide thei r work in all the negotiating 
fora and i n all the trade areas that we re currently being negotiated if they  wanted to ensure a non -
discrim inatory trading syste m that would benefit all and would  ensure a level playing field. Moldova 
was pleased to note that progress and those in the  joint initiatives from Buenos Aires particularly on 
gender and trade and e -commerce. Many Members had  underlined their full engagem ent and active 
participation in the  discussion s on the work programme on SMEs and on Investment Facilitation. 
Moldova commended the work of  the Trade Facilitation Committee which had  shown great 
transparency and commitment t o information sharing for the ben efit of all, took note of the work of 
other Committees and  welcome d the communication on "Pr ocedures t o Enhance Transparency and 
Strengthen Notification R equirements under WTO Agreements ".  
1.20.   As a mem ber of the Article XII Group, Moldova reiterated the  need to work towards reducing 
imbalances in th e commitments undertaken by Members through constructive negotiations. On 
Agriculture, Moldova attached  great importance to the implementation of Paragraph 31 of the Nairobi 
Ministerial Declaration and the  commitmen t undertaken by all Members to eliminate all types o f 
agriculture subsidies which was  essentially mitigating the distortive effects in the agriculture sector 
and in advancing domestic reforms.  
1.21.   While  addres sing such gaps, Members should also  work towards mutually beneficial outcomes 
especially in the area of dispute settlement in order to avoid the impas se in the Appellate Body. Later 
in the meeting, Members would  hear many proposals and communications on DSU reform  and the 
role of the Appellate Body. That was an issue of great interest even for Members that we re not 
frequently involved in trade dispu tes as a direct or third party because the DSB had been  intended as 
a guarantor of compliance and respe ct for the WTO Rules. Any circumstance  that hamper ed the 
smooth functi oning of the Appellate Body sent  a negative message to the world about the role of the 
WTO. Moldova looked forward to continuing the  dialogue  on those and other topics  to make the 
multilateral trading system up to date and able to respond  to the needs of a rapidly developing society.  
1.22.   Members'  communic ation and diplomatic skills would enable them  to be open towards the 
initiation of a construc tive dialogue which would  bring a common result for international trade. Moldova WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 6 - 
 
  therefore  urged all Members to engage constructively and  diplomatically with the view to  ensuring an 
effective, relevant and op erative WTO. They should  tackle the challe nges before them  and their 
differences through dialogue and serious engagement in order to avoid systemic  blockages, market 
uncertainty and increased consumer and business concerns in international trade.  
1.23.   The representative of El Salvador  thank ed the Director -General  and the Chairs of the 
Negotiating Groups for their reports at the meeting on 10 December . Without a doubt,  there was much 
to do and it was important to recognise that it had to be done by Members  and no one else.  If he had 
learned anything over the years, it was that there was no magic wand and the more they  waited, the 
more they  slowed down the progress that the organization needed. El Salvador would  always support 
and contrib ute to the strengthening of the organization  for which there wa s no substitute.  
1.24.   On a personal note, as it was his last Gener al Council meeting, he  would like to have it on 
record that it had  been an honour and a privilege to represent El  Salvador over the years in the WTO 
which had  a unique role as a multilateral body driving and monitoring compliance with the multilateral 
trade rules and thereby promoting the fair exchange of  goods and services among its Members.  
1.25.   He had no doubt that he would close that chapter of his life feeling that it had  been a very 
enriching experience, both professionally and personally. From the perspective of a country that, 
though small, was  a true b eliever in the importance of trade as a tool for the development of their 
peoples, he left feeling satisfied with all the work carrie d out in all the spheres of that  great institution. 
With that said, tackling  the new chal lenges facing the global order remained a necessity . 
1.26.   From its creation, the WTO had been set up as an important tool for promoting global economic 
stability and  as a faithful guarantor of the principles that govern ed it through which the effects of 
various global economic shocks, includ ing financial crises and protectionist trends, which affect ed the 
stability of all Members and partic ularly the most vulnerable, had been contained. I t would be a great 
error to try to quantify in numerical terms alone the benefits that accrue d to thei r countries from the 
WTO Agreements, especially to young democracies like El Salvador , as that would overlook 
achievements in t erms of social welfare and long -term public policy stability, among others.  
1.27.   Having personally lived through several difficult periods  in El Salvador, from a civil war to peace 
processes a nd then to the repercussions currently  faced stemming from both, as a Salvadoran , he 
could  say with complet e certainty that maintaining  young democracies was imperative for stability in 
every respect, n ot just for El Salvador but for the region.  
1.28.   Salvadorans we re driven and enterprising people. They did  not lose heart when confronted with 
adversity. On the contrary, they we re optimists and smile d in the face of challenges. They  casted 
aside, without any r esentment, everything that kept them  from growing as a country a nd as human 
beings. He was amazed at what they we re capable of  when confronted with adversity given the 
limitations that they  faced. It wa s the experience of h aving lived through the events he  had been 
exposed to from a young age that had allowed him in his position  to be able to continue to advance 
the cause of multilateral  trade on behalf of El Salvador  in a manner clearly consistent with their 
national reality  and to do so resolutely, knowle dgeably and perseveringly  notwithstanding the several 
differe nt changes of government that they had had – seeking to build bridges with th e domestic 
authorities that had  competence with respect to t he work of the WTO . 
1.29.   Concerning the current  complex economi c and tra de environment, from any point of view, any 
challenge in life should be seen as an opportunity for improvement. Those who knew him  would know 
that he was an optimist by nature and while he understood that the path they had ahead of them in 
the org anization would not be an easy one, he was convinced that they had before them a unique 
opportunity which they should grasp with courage and pragmatism, without  forgetting the history that 
had led them to that point, as otherwise they would  continue ma king the same mistakes that had 
brought them  there. It seemed that for many, the period the organization was currently facing had  
served to reaffirm the importance with w hich it wa s invested.  
1.30.   The responsibility of  Permanent Representatives to the WTO in Geneva  was enormous because, 
as they had first -hand knowledge of the aspec ts discussed and negotiated there, thei r opinions and 
guidance play ed an importa nt role in the decisions that their countries took on those issues. That wa s 
why, when an opportunity presented  itself to not only update the rules that govern ed trade in light of 
the new realities but also to improve the f unctioning of the o rganization to maintain its long -term WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 7 - 
 
  relevance, th e elements that should define their work should include a forward -looking pragmatism 
and the principles of fairness, transparency  as seen in a new light and appropriate  to all Members , 
and inclusiveness that took  into account the legitimate interes ts and realities of all Members  including 
the most v ulnerable ones. Witho ut tho se elements, Members would  be condemned to seeing the 
reform processes fail to yield a str engthened o rganization with updated rules, ready to help them with 
the current challenges that they knew the world wa s facing.  
1.31.   He ba de farewell to his  colleague s and friends who had helped enrich the conduct of his duties 
in the organization. He would always carry with him the experiences gained where they had  not only 
worked side by side to promote thei r com mon interests and those of the organization  but had also 
cultivate d friendships that would  last through  the years. He  also hope d they would be able to provide 
their support to the person who would soon occupy his  post. 
1.32.   He also thanked the Secr etariat, headed by the Director -General and the Deputy Directors -
General, and the team of tra nslators and interpreters. He was convinced that the WTO had a 
Secretariat that was  ready to embrace the changes required by the times in a professional  and 
responsible manner and it was important that they  continue d supporting it.  
1.33.   He wished every one a holiday season marked with  well-being and harmony and hoped that  the 
Creator would always guide thei r steps for the common good.  
1.34.    The General Council took note  of the report of the Chairman of the TNC and of the Director -
General's rep ort on 10 December, and of the statements delivered at the current meeting and at the 
10 December Informal TNC and Informal HODs meetings.  
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF TH E BALI, NAIROBI AND BUENOS AIRES OUTCOME S (G/RO/87) – 
STATEMENT BY THE CHA IRMAN  
2.1.  The Chairman4 said that the item remained  on the agenda  so that the General Council could  
continue to follow up on the decisions adopted in Bali, Nairobi and Buenos Aires – and do so in a 
horizontal and transparent manner.  
2.2.  On 4 D ecember, in preparation for the General C ouncil meeting, he had  held a meeting with the 
Chairs of Regular Bodies. They had  had a very useful and productive discussion, and their updates on 
the implementati on of the Ministerial mandates were the basis of his statement that day. M atters 
related to the Work Programmes on Small Economies  and on Electronic Commerce would  be taken  up 
in the next two items of the  agenda.  
2.3.  Regarding the Buenos Aires Decision on TRIPS Non -Violation and Situation C omplaints, the TRIPS 
Council had  continued the examination of  scope and modalities for such complaints at its recent  
meeting in November. There had been  some encouraging signs indicating delegations' readiness to 
engage in a substantive examination of scope and modalities for non -violation and situation 
complaints. Possible con ditions for such complaints had  also been mentioned. A number of Members 
had also emphasis ed the need for a thorough discussion in the TRIPS Council before taking any 
decision. The Chair  had indicated his availability for informal consultations  ahead of the Council's next 
meeting in February.  
2.4.  Concerning  some of the Ministerial outcomes on Agriculture, the Committee on Agriculture had 
continued the review of the Bali Decision on TRQ Administration at its meeting in November. The 
review had benefi ted from a thematic session on TRQ administration and underfill mechanism, 
involving the participation of industry represent atives. The review discussion was expected to intensify 
the following year  for th e finaliz ation of recommendations to be submitted t o the General Council at 
the end of 2019 in line with the Decision.  
2.5.  Regarding the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition, Members would  recall that the Committee 
on Agriculture had conducted the first triennial review of the Decision and had adopted the re port of 
the Review in September.  
                                                
4 The Chairman's statem ent w as circulated in JOB/GC/210 . WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 8 - 
 
  2.6.  With respec t to the implementation of that Decision by Members with scheduled export subsidies 
reductio n commitments, the situation had  improved significantly in the last months, with seven 
Members with their revised export  subsidies schedules certified; one Member with partial certification,  
and its full certification currently under way; two Members with draft revised schedules circulated, 
although not yet certified; and one additional Member, namely Iceland, who had just submitted to the 
Secretariat its draft revised export subsidies schedule for circulation. Other Members with scheduled 
export subsidies commitments had provided an update on the steps taken to implement the Decision 
at the November meeting of the Committe e on Agriculture.  
2.7.  On a separate matter, he noted  that, in the meeting wit h the Chairs of Regular Bodies he had 
referred to, the Chair of the Committee on Agriculture had stressed that efforts we re under way in the 
Committee to improve the timeliness and co mpleteness of notifications.  
2.8.  Moving to the Decision on Preferential Rules of Origin for LDCs, the Committee on Rules of Origin 
had conducted the annual review of recent developments related to preferential rules of or igin for 
LDCs. A report summarising the  main developments had been adopted, and wa s before the General  
Council in G/RO/87. Amongst tho se, the Committee had noted that almost all preference -granting 
Members had submitted their preferential rules of origin using the template agreed to by the 
Comm ittee – with 6 Members still to submit their origin requirements using the agreed template. The 
Committee had also discussed rules of origin based on the tariff classification criterion; access to 
information; the status of implementation of the self -certification system for registered exporters; and 
a report by the Secretariat on utilization rates.  
2.9.  The LDC group had noted that the im plementation of the Decision had been  an on going process 
and that there had  still been scope to simplify and reform the preferential rules of origin of all 
preference -granting Members.  
2.10.   Turning to the LDC Services Waiver, at the previous  week's meeting of the Council for Trade in 
Services, Members had reverted to the suggestions by the LDC Group in its communication entitled  
"Possible Elements for a Review of the Oper ation of Notified Preferences". It had been  agreed that the 
Services Council  would hold a dedicated meeting at a date to be determined  at which Members would 
exchange information as part of the mandate in the Nai robi Decision that the Council "initiate a process 
to review the operation of notified preferences, on the basis of information provide d by Members".  
The Chairman would  be holding informal consultations on the agenda, date and organizational aspects 
of the dedicated meeting.   
2.11.   Concerning  the Bali Decision on the Monitoring Mechanism on Special and Differential 
Treatment, at the recent meeting of the CTD's Dedicated Session on the Monitoring Mechanism, the 
CTD Chairman had noted that no written submissions had yet been made to operationalis e the 
Mechanism, and that divergent views had persisted on how to proceed with the re view of the 
Mechanism which had been  mandated to take place three years after the first formal meeting. The 
Chairman  had urged Members to  come to a common understanding on the way forward and  had 
indicated that they would continue his informal disc ussions with delegations in that  regard.  
2.12.   With respect to DFQF market access for LDCs, the Bali Decision had instructed the CTD to 
annually review  the steps taken to provide DFQF market access to LDCs. The review had  to be based, 
inter alia, on a background report to be prepared by the Secretariat, in close coordination with 
Members. The review had taken  place at the November meeting of  the CTD. How ever, and as it had 
been already the case in 2017, the review had been carried out without the report by the Secretariat, 
due to the persistent divergent views expressed by some Members on the scope and coverage of the 
report. The Chairman intended  to cont inue consulting with Members on issues relating to DFQF and 
the Secretariat report.  
2.13.   Regarding Aid for Trade, in November , Members had agreed to the 2019 Aid -for-Trade 
Monitoring and Evaluation exercise on: "Supporting Economic Diversification and Empowerme nt for 
Inclusive, Sustainable Develo pment". This exercise invited  Members to submit an electronic self -
assessment questionnaire and communicate their national situation with regard to Aid for Trade, and 
the dead line for submitting responses was 31 December . The 2019  Aid for Trade Glob al Review would 
be held on 3 -5 July . WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 9 - 
 
  2.14.   And lastly, on the implementation of the Trade Facilitation Agreement, Members currently stood 
at 140 ratifications  coveri ng more than 85% of the total. He understood that more we re in the p ipeline.  
2.15.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the ACP , thank ed the Chairman for his  report on 
the implementation of recent Ministerial outco mes from Bali to Buenos Aires. The ACP  support ed the 
LDC Group in particular in their call for the operationa lization and implementation of the decisions 
taken in their favour at those Ministerial Conferences. T he modernization and strengthening of the 
multilateral trading system however required that all Ministerial undertakings were adhered to – to 
accompany ef forts to ensure implementation of obligations ac ross all WTO Agreements. That was 
particularly important as Members  agree d to work programmes reported by the Chairs of the 
Negotiating G roups for 2019 and embark ed on negotiations to arrive at decisions expected before and 
at the next Ministerial Conference in Astana.   
2.16.   The representative of the Central African Republic , on behalf of the LDCs , reiterated their 
message in relation to the implementation of the Bali and  Nairobi Decisions. It was essential for LDCs 
that Ministerial Decisions taken in their favour were fully implemented in order to make a tangible and 
meaningful impact on the economic growth of their countries and on achieving a better market share 
in worl d trade.  
2.17.   The implementation of decisions on duty -free and quota -free market access, rules of origin and 
services waiver for their economic actors would help them in achieving the 2030 Sustainable 
Development Goals.  
2.18.   The LDCs thanked the Members that had not ified and put in place preferences for LDCs, in 
accordance with the Ministerial Decisions taken. The LDCs also encouraged Members that had not yet 
done so to make their notifications and to implement the preferences.  
2.19.   Beyond that, the LDCs called on Members  and the Secretariat to provide all the necessary 
technical assistance needed to enable LDCs to make practical use of the preferences granted.  
2.20.   The General Council took note  of the Chairman's statement, of the report of the Committee on 
Rules of Origin in document G/RO/87 and of the other statements.  
3  WORK PROGRAMME ON SM ALL ECONOMIES – REPO RT BY THE CHAIRMAN O F THE 
DEDICATED SESSION OF  THE COMMITTEE ON TR ADE AND DEVELOPMENT  
3.1.  The Chairman  recalled that in line 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 reported regularly to the Council on the progress of wor k in its Dedicated Sessions. In 
Buenos Aires, Ministers had adopted a Decision reaffirming their commitment to the Work Programme 
and instructing the CTD to continue its work in Dedicated Sessions under the overall responsibility of 
the General Council.  
3.2.  Ambassador Diego Aulestia (Ecuador) , Chairman of the Dedicated Session of the CTD , reported 
that, as had been announced in the previous  General Council meeting in October, the CTD's 37th 
Dedicate d Session on Small Economies had been held on 1 November. That had been  the second of 
two meetings  the Dedicated Session held that  year to continue its work on the background document 
prepared by the Secretariat (WT/COMTD/SE/W/34) regarding the challenges and opportunities 
experienced by small economies in their effor ts to reduce trade costs, particularly in the area of trade 
facilitation, as had been mandated at the Eleventh  Ministerial Conference.  
3.3.  That time, the discussion had focused on best practices and policy approaches for addressing the 
challenges identified in  the first meeti ng. Representatives from UNCTAD' s Trade Logistics Branch and 
the EIF  had made presentations and representatives from SVEs had shared their national experiences.  
3.4.  The presentations  had addressed subjects such as the determinants of transport  costs and how 
to reduce them. Regional coordination in the planning of port investments and the moder nization of 
seaports had been  mentioned as possible policy options that could help to reduce costs. The latest 
changes in the maritime transport, especial ly the company mergers and the consequent concentrat ion 
of the offer in few hands, we re issues to be seriously addressed by policy makers. The new balance WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 10 - 
 
  would  also affect the ba rgain margin port operators had  as ships we re becoming bigger and more 
effective but less ports we re able to receive them.  
3.5.  It had also been noted that digital connectivity could be a way to reduce costs in SVEs. 
Inform ation and transaction costs had been  increasing their share of all trade costs and that WTO data 
had indicat ed that new digital technologies could reduce trade costs by 10.5% by 2030.  
3.6.  Afterwards, representatives from SVEs – Mongolia and Mauritius – had spoke n about the 
particular problems of la ndlocked countries and insular S tates, such as the costs incurred wh ile 
transporting goods through borders. Some potential solutions to the challenges faced by SVEs which 
had been analysed and discussed in the previous session, such as a study on specific comparative 
advantages for each SVE, including the pharmaceutical in dustry, blue ocean economy, d eep ocean 
water application had been  suggested.  
3.7.  It had been  noted that some of the challenges faced by SVEs such as governments' inefficiencies, 
inadequate legal frameworks and lac k of regional coordination, had been under the ir control and it 
had been  their responsibility to improve  them. Nevertheless, others had  not been, such as SPS and 
TBT regulations from trading partners and private standards, so enough policy s pace should be 
preserved. It had been said that SVEs had been  "sandwiched" between the LDCs and the developing 
countries, and that some flexibilities given to LDCs, such as the services waiver, should apply to them 
as well.  
3.8.  Several representatives of SVEs had taken  the floor to share their national experiences and to 
ask qu estions and to make comments on tho se matters. They had raised issues such as th e adoption 
of legal instruments;  simplification , harmonization and automation of all processes related to  
international trade operations; TFA progress; single windows;  e-commerce and technology costs;  lack 
of access to digital payment solutions; lagging financial legislation;  lack of knowledge regarding the 
use of e -commerce;  public -private part nerships  and development and training of human resources.  
3.9.  The SVE Group was  working on an outcome document ba sed on the discussions held that  year 
in the Dedicated Session which would be discussed in its following  meeting.  
3.10.   The representative of Guatemala , on behalf of the SVEs , thank ed the CTD Chair for his report 
on the Work Prog ramme on Small Economies. As he  had mentioned, the Dedicated Session  had held 
its second session in November  under the topic of challenges small e conomies experience d in their 
efforts to reduce trade cost particularly in the area of trade fac ilitation. The  objective of that meeting 
had been to propose solutions to tho se issues with particular emphasis on solutions at the multilateral 
level.  
3.11.   Representatives from UNCTAD and the Secretariat had made general presentations touching 
upon the topics of trade cost and transport and technological solutions to reduce trade cost. The 
delegation of Mongolia had made a presentation on  the importance of trade facilitation in inter -regional 
trade in particul ar to landlocked developing States presenting the example from the economic corridor 
between China, the Russia n Federation  and Mongolia. The delegation of Mauritius had made a 
presentation from a small island State 's perspective on trade facilitation measu res implemented such 
as the single window system and trade obstacles mechanism w hile also elaborating on challenges 
relating to environmental risk factors, technology deficits and strengthen ing trade rules that 
constrain ed the range of solutions available to SVEs introducing trade cost. Othe r SVEs had taken  the 
floor to present national experiences and presented examples of possible solutions for furth er 
discussions.  
3.12.   The SVEs  Group wa s preparing an outcome document to summarise the main topics mentioned 
during that meeting highlighting some of the solu tions presented which could  hopefully motivate new 
discussions on the subject. T he Group  looked forward to exchanging views on tho se issues in the 
future.  
3.13.   The representative of Mauritius  thanked  the Chair of t he CTD and the WTO Secretariat for 
making the participation of the capital -based expert from Mauritius possible during the dedicated 
session in Nove mber. Mauritius associate d itself with the statement made by Guatemala on behalf of 
the SVEs and thanked them for their work as coordinator and reiterate d its commitment to the work WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 11 - 
 
  of the WTO especially as an important forum for small economies including small island developing 
States like Mauritius to engage on multilateral trade issues.  
3.14.   During the November me eting, Mauritius had shared its  experience with regard to measures 
implemented in the context of customs and institutional reforms which had  led to a reduction in trade 
cost. Although trade facilitatio n measures could  successfully tackle trade cost drivers  such as 
inefficiencies in the supply chain or lack of compliance with international best trad e facilitative 
practices, SVEs we re disproportionately affected by challenges such as natural disasters and 
environmental risk, regional or global security, compl iant cost to private standards a nd stringent trade 
rules which we re trade cost drivers not traditionally capt ured in trade facilitation. Tho se issues could 
be further examined in the context of the work programme on small economies.  
3.15.   The General Council took note  of the report of the Chairman of the CTD and of the statements.  
4  WORK PROGRAMME ON EL ECTRONIC COMMERCE – REVIEW OF PROGRESS (S/C/56, 
G/C/64)  
4.1.  The Chairman5 recalled that at MC11, Ministers had adopted a Decision on the Work Programme 
on Electronic Commerce. In that  Decision, Ministers had decided to continue the work under the Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce and  had instructed the General Council to hold periodic reviews 
in its sessions of July and December 2018 and July 201 9, base d on the reports that could  be submitted 
by the WTO bodies entrusted with the implementation  of the Work Programme – and those we re the 
Councils for Services, Goods and TRIPS, and the Committee on Trade and Development.  
4.2.  In that respect, he provided  a very  brief overview of the work that had  been taking pla ce in each 
of the four bodies. The Chairs of the Council for Trade in Services and of the Council for Trade in Goods 
had each submitted a written report to the General Council under their own responsibili ty. Those 
reports we re contained in S/C/56 and G/C/64, respectively, and ga ve an overview of the discussions 
that had taken  place in the two Councils since their  last review of progress in July.  
4.3.  As regar ds the TRIPS Council, there had  been no new developme nts since thei r review in July as 
no discussion of the wo rk under the Work Programme had taken place at the Council's meeting in 
November. Under "Other Business" , the TRIPS Council Chair had noted the absence of any movement 
and had recalled that intereste d delegations could request the inclu sion of an item for the Council' s 
next meeting in February.  
4.4.  With respect to the CTD, the Work Programme on E -Commerce had been  listed on the ag enda 
of all its three meetings in 2018 . Alth ough some preliminary ideas had been shared about possible 
work in the CTD in that area, there we re no concrete proposals on th e table. Nevertheless, a number 
of delegations  had indicated their interest, and the Committee would  revert to the Work Programme 
on E-Commerce at its next meeti ng. 
4.5.  At the October General Council meeting, he had mentioned that he had held consultations with 
Members on how to move forward the discussion on the e -commerce moratorium, following the 
submission by South Africa and India (WT/GC/W/747). Based on t he view s expressed by Members, 
he had  convened an informal open -ended meeting on 27 November. The suggested topics for 
discussion had included the scope and definition of electronic transmissions; revenue implications of 
the moratorium; the technical feasibility of imposing customs duties; and the broader impact of the 
moratorium on trade and industrializ ation.  
4.6.  Members had  had a productive discussion. India and South Africa had recalled their objective of 
having a fresh examination of the impact of the moratorium . In their view, the im pact of the 
moratorium should  be understood from the revenue point of view and its continuation should be 
examined based on concrete facts and sta tistics. Several delegations had seen  merit in having further 
work and research on the scope of the moratorium and had highlighted the need to take into account 
the developmental dimension.  
4.7.  Other delegations had noted how the moratorium had encouraged e -commerce and provided 
predictability. On the scope of the moratorium, tho se delegation s' view was that it included  the 
                                                
5 The Chairman's report was circulated in WT/GC/W/756 . WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 12 - 
 
  content, otherwise the moratorium would be meaningless. Regarding the technical feasibility of 
imposing customs duties on electronic transmissions, they had noted the difficulty and burden of 
determining the specific amounts and value of electronic transmissions. As had been mentioned during 
the bilateral consultations, some delegations had noted that Members had been  free to impose internal 
taxes and charges.  
4.8.  In conclusion, as had been noted during his  bilateral discussions and at the informal open -ended 
meeting, he  welcome d continued discussion on that issue, which was in line with Ministers'  decision 
to "reinvigorate" the Work Programme. Clearly , all issues raised require d more analysis and 
informatio n. In that regard, further suggestions and contributions would be useful. It was his hope 
that discussions could  continue in a transparent, inclusive and Member -driven manner, keeping in 
mind the need for a decision on the moratorium by the end of 2019. He  remain ed ready to consult 
further with delegations.  
4.9.  The representative of the Central African Republic , on behalf of the LDCs , noted that the LDCs 
were sensitive to th e issue of e -commerc e to the extent that it recognised  the potential b enefits in 
terms of enhancing thei r participat ion and integration into international trade.  
4.10.   The LDCs were however  facing significant infrastructural challenges and had significantly 
insufficient material and technical resources  to claim that their economies were benefiting  or would  
benefit fully in the near future from the digital economy.  
4.11.   Indeed, by taking only a few indicators produced by the International Telecommunications 
Union, it appeared  that only 18% of their population used the i nternet in 2016. In addition, only  1% 
of the LDC population had broadband internet connection in 2017. Moreover, most of them 
experienced insufficiency of secure internet servers and lacked sufficient legislation in the fight against 
cybercrime or the protection of consume rs. Only around 40 % of LDCs had  e-commerce or e -court 
legislation. Other constraints also persisted.  
4.12.   In the context of the WTO  discussions on e -commerce, it wa s essential that the instruction 
given by Ministers in 1998, following the establishment of a Work P rogram me on Ele ctronic Commerce, 
be followed, in particular, t o discuss the e-commerce issue  taking into account the economic, financial 
and developmen t needs of developing countries  and to prepare a progress report on the work  
programme  and possible recommendations for action.  
4.13.   In line with that  mandate and in view of the concrete challenges facing LDCs in order to 
economically benefit from e -commerce, it was fundamental that the Work P rogram me be  reinvigorated 
to also take into account the realities faced by LDCs in that  regard . 
4.14.   The LDCs thanked the Chairman for convening a recent meeting on the Work P rogram me on 
Electronic C ommerce and on the m oratorium on customs duties and encouraged more similar meetings 
in the future.  
4.15.   The representative of India recalled that India h ad been one of the proponents and welcomed  
the decision taken at MC11 to strengthen the 1998 Work Programme on Ele ctronic Commerce. E -
Commerce had  created new and exciting opportunities in global trade.  At the same time, it also posed  
significant infrastru cture and regulatory challenges especially fo r developing countries which could 
lose out on tho se opportunities due to the huge digital divide.  
4.16.   As the digital revol ution was unfolding, there were still large gaps in their  understanding on 
issues like effec ts of e -commerce on existing trade rules and issues related  to technology transfer. 
There were also gaps in policy in that area in several countries. It was in that  context that India and 
South Africa had introduced the proposal on "Moratorium on Customs D uties on Electronic 
Transmissions: A Need for a R e-think" in the General Council. The proposal was discussed in an 
informal open -ended meeting of the General Council on 27 November . As t he realit ies prevailing in 
1998 when Members had agreed for the first time to the temporary moratorium on customs duties in 
electronic transmissions had changed significantly, tho se changes necessitate d a re-examination of 
the implications of the moratorium particularly from the development perspective.  
4.17.   With the advent of I ndustry 4.0 and the advance of 3 -D Printing t echnologies, the moratorium 
would  erode the existing GATT bound rates which we re typically higher in developing cou ntries. India  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 13 - 
 
  propose d to cont inue engaging with Members as they  looked forward to better and mo re 
comprehensi ve empirical studies to guide them in thei r decision -making process. The MC11 Decision 
on the e -commerce moratorium would  continue until December 2019. They  therefore had before them 
almost a year to revisit the various issues identified by t he Members in the context of that  moratorium.  
4.18.   Referring to the report by the CTS Chair on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, 
India clarified that it did  not intend to engage on a discussion on the moratorium in th e CTS as the 
General Council had  already seized of the matter. As customs duties wa s however listed as an issue 
for discussion in the CTS under the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce a nd given that the 
moratorium had been  identified as a cross -cutting issue, Members appear ed within their rights to raise 
the issue in the CTS and the CTG.  
4.19.   India also reiterate d its concerns on panel discussions on e -commerce under the Joint 
Statement Initiative with the objective o f rule -making which clearly ran  contrary to the exploratory 
mandate of the 1998 multilateral Work Programme on Electronic Commerce which had  been reaffi rmed 
by all Members at MC11. India's  considered view on rules and disciplines o n e-commerce was that the 
same w ould be highly premature at that  stage given the highly a symmetric nature of the existing 
global e -commerce space.  
4.20.   The UNCTAD's recently released report on trade and development 2018 gave  a very timely 
warning to developing countries on how they could lose out to dig ital monopolies unless they took  
charge of the ir trade and investment policies. They we re therefore committed to reinvigorate work on 
the multilateral track with its non -negot iating mandate to understand tho se issues bette r. That would  
also build a strong foundation to the growth of e -commerce  which i n turn would benefit all of them . 
4.21.   The representative of South Africa  thanked the  Chair man for his r eport and for having convened 
the informal GC meeting on the temporary moratorium on electronic transmissions.  
4.22.   The purpo se of that meeting had been for Memb ers to have an exchange of views on the e -
commerce moratorium and begin t o address the shortcomings in thei r discussions, both in respect to 
definitional aspects of e -commerce and  on data. On data, they had  focused attention on the S ecretariat 
note of 2016  that had been  widely referenced in the July meeting. Reflecting on th e informal meeting, 
South Africa had been surprised that many Members we re already pronouncing on the extension of 
the mo ratorium even though it wa s clear that the empirical and definiti onal b asis for a proper 
assessment had  not been done.  
4.23.   In its intervention, South Africa had  identified a range of shortcomings in the Secretariat note 
that had offered some ideas for further empirical work tha t Members could find useful. South Africa 
repeated its call for  the Secretariat in collaboration  with other multilateral organizations and 
institutions  to continue work to address the data shortcomings, to consider questions of definition and 
to work  towards a further discussion among st Members in the  course of the following  year on the basis 
of more clarity on those matters. Without proper assessment, most developing countries would find it 
difficult for informed policy -making, and that could well impact on the discussions about the 
moratorium at the end of 2019.  
4.24.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the ACP , said that the ACP Group had supported 
the continuation of the discussions on the moratorium on customs duties on electronic transmissions 
and had suggested further work on e -commerce statistics and data to better inform  Members as 
developments in that area unfolded.  
4.25.   Continuing c ross-cutting discussions in the General Council and discussions in the four 
designated bodies remained necessary. Efforts should  be made to examine the develop ment 
component of th e Work Programme in a manner that would find  solutions to the challenges that 
plague d devel oping countries and LDCs in that regard – which included  ways to support de veloping 
countries and LDCs struggling  to bridge the digital divide an d to ensure that adequate information  was 
provided on international efforts which cater ed to the diverse countries in the ACP Group.   
4.26.   The ACP Group thanked the  various delega tions that had  contributed  to the disc ussions under 
the ambit of the Work P rogram me over the last two years. As Members  approach ed the expiry of the 
E-Commerce decision in 2019, the ACP Group  encourage d the steps taken  by the Chairman  to allow 
for debate and questions  among Members.  In addition, better coordination with other relevant WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 14 - 
 
  institutions with mandates related to e -commerce should be undertaken to increase the level of 
knowledge and understanding and to enable all Members to diagnose efforts needed for a balanced 
discussion on the issues arising on the Work Programme in the WTO . 
4.27.   The representative of Nigeria  welcome d the oppo rtunity for the General Council to hold the 
current review of the Work Programme  based on the reports submitt ed by the respective WTO bodies 
entrusted with its  implementation. Nigeria supported  the continuat ion of inf ormation and experience 
sharing horizontally in order to enhance Members'  understan ding on a range of issues that were cross -
cutting in nature. Nigeria wa s activ e in the e -commerce discussions. It remained an active member of 
the "Friends of E -Commerce for  Development"  led by Cost a Rica and Pakistan and of the Joint 
Statement on E -Commerce at MC11 in Buenos Aires.  
4.28.   Nigeria considered the t hematic exploratory discussions  under the Joint Initiative led by 
Australia, Japan and Singapore useful in cla rifying the basic ter minology relating to e -commerce  in 
order to reach a common understanding of the s cope and coverage of e -commerce including the 
examination and analysis of gaps in the WTO Agreements relating to e -commerce; exploration of the 
cross-cutting issues; analyses of existing barriers to e -commerce and possible next steps  includ ing 
possible multilateral rules through text -based discussions.  
4.29.   The multilateral track should be mutually supportive of the J oint Initiative track. Nigeria thanked 
the co -conveners of the Joint Initiative  for the inclusive , open and transparent process including 
regula r summary reports to the wider Membership which would  build trust. It was  also important t o 
build on and sustain that  momentum.  
4.30.   As e-commerce could serve as a tool to support economic development, Nigeria attached  great 
importan ce to the e -commerce discussion s especially  to its development aspects . It was therefore 
encouraging to see Members  at different levels of development  participating actively in the 
discussions.  
4.31.   Concerning the  Buenos Aires Joint Statement  Initiative on Electronic Commerce , Nigeria shared  
the initiative's goal of advancing e -commerce work  to better harn ess the opportunities it created  for 
inclusive trade and d evelopment. At the same time, it recognis ed the challenge s faced by developing 
countries, especially the LDCs, and MSMEs. In that  regard, t heir work should build on  WTO rules . The 
initiative should be undertaken without prejudice to exist ing WTO agreements and mandates especially 
as the exploratory work wa s aimed at future WTO negotiations on trade -related aspects of e -
commerce.  
4.32.   Nigeria also underscore d the relevance of the TFA  in that  regard especiall y for creating a n 
enabling environment for MSMEs'  participa tion in cross -border e -commerce particularly on matters 
related to paperles s trading, de minimis  exemption  and simplified customs procedures . 
4.33.   As transparency remained to be a  fundamental WTO principle and central to the e -commerce 
discussion, information about e -commerce measures  should be made available publicly by notifying 
relevant  measures to the WTO. They should however avoid duplication of work and should to take into 
account the admini strative burden of notification  especially on developing and least -developed 
countries.  
4.34.   The initiative should also h ighlight the cro ss-cutting nature of e -commerce  including the 
interlinkages between the issues which shoul d be examined in detail. In that  regard, they should avoid 
duplic ation of  efforts and ensure coherence with  the work progra mme.  
4.35.   Through the submissions by  proponents, comments and  clarifications had been made  as 
appropriate and questions had been  responded t o. Overall, the submissions had been  welcomed as a 
good basis f or moving the exploratory work forward. Nigeria  had observe d different levels of ambition 
and varying degree s of complexity that could require different approaches – which it remained open 
to discuss.   
4.36.   They should  ensure that the c oncerns of developing cou ntries especially the  LDCs in terms of 
capacity challenges and infrastructure constraints were taken into consideration and that the 
Ministerial Decision at MC12 should provide a  clear direction on future work . WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 15 - 
 
  4.37.   In spite of the positive spir it of engagement , Nigeria was mindful of  some legitimate concerns. 
While it was clear that e -commerce was  developin g rapidly across the globe, that development was 
highly uneven and e -commerce wa s extremely concentrated amongst a few  countries. That 
underscored  the persis tence and depth of  the digital divide that related  to infrastructure, finance, 
technology, industry, skills and income.  
4.38.   The wider digital tran sformation of which e -commerce was integral could  be disruptive.  
4.39.   Critical segments of the digital economy and e -commerce we re highly oligopolistic, replete with 
instances of rent -seeking, anti -competitive practices, tax evasion, and associated with a wea kening 
of labour conditions. Those posed  unprecedented challenges to national regulators and governments.  
4.40.   Nigeria agree d with the Chairman  on the  need to reinvigorate the work p rogram me as mandated 
and that all issues raised in connect ion with the moratorium required  further research and analysis.  
4.41.   The representative of Japan  hoped  that the Work P rogramme and  the Joint Statement Initiative 
on Electronic Commerce based on the Joint Statement at MC11 would  continue to make progress b y 
complementing each other. It wa s crucial to continue the non -application of customs duties to 
electronic transmissions for the sake  of continuing to provide  predictability to the business 
environment. Japan wished  to continue to intensify discussions on the continuation of the non-
applica tion taking into account what they had  discussed at the open-ended meeting on 27 November 
includin g the definition and scope of electronic transmission s with its benefits to their  economies.  
4.42.   The Chairman  noted that as he had said in his statement, he  hoped that those discussions 
would  contin ue in a Member -driven manner and that he  remain ed ready to con sult further with 
delegations.  
4.43.   The General Council took note  of the Chairman's statement, of the reports in documents S/C/56 
and G/C/64 and of the other statements.  
5  THE DEVELOPMENT ASSI STANCE ASPECTS OF CO TTON – STATEMENT BY THE DIRECTOR -
GENERAL  
5.1.  The Chairman recalled that in  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 Initiative. The Council  had also instructed the 
Director -General to consult with the relevant international organizations, including the Bretton Woods 
Institutions, the FAO and the ITC, to direct effectively existing programmes and any additional 
resources towards development of th e economies w here cotton had  vital importance. The Bali and 
Nairobi Decisions had reaffirmed that  mandate, and had invited the Director -General to continu e to 
provide periodic reports. He understoo d that De puty Director -General Alan Wolff would report on t hat 
issue on behalf of th e Director -General . 
5.2.  Deputy Director -General Alan Wolff, on behalf of the Director -General , provide d an update on 
the progress of their  work on the Development Assi stance aspects of Cotton which he  chaired on 
behalf of the Director -General . 
5.3.  Since the Di rector -General's November 2017 report, progress continued to be made on that 
important aspect of their work. That progress wa s reflected in the latest version of the Evolving Table 
on Cotton Development Assistance  circulated o n 15 November (WT/CFMC/6/Rev.25).    
5.4.  He report ed that the  figures and information in that  version of the Evolving Table show ed an 
increase in active cotton -specific development assistance. The total nu mber of projects listed in Part  I 
("Cotton Speci fic Dev elopment Assistance") had  increased to 29 (up from 26), for a total value of 
committed resources of US$238.2 million (up from US$204).  
5.5.  He was  also pleased to note that discussions under agenda item 6 of  the Consultative Mechanism 
had been extremely dynamic . Under item 6, beneficiaries present ed the key elements of their new 
projects for feedback by potential partners, and donors share d the results and lessons learned from 
on-going and concluded projects.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 16 - 
 
  5.6.  That agenda  item 6 entitled "projects" had been  included upon the C-4's request to give a more 
pragmatic imprint to the WTO's work on cotton development assistance.  
5.7.  That increase in relevance and constructivenes s of discussions on projects had  prompted the 
extension of the biannual meetings of the Mecha nism to a full day. That  extension of time, besides 
being necessary to accommodate the several proje ct presentations under item 6, wa s yet another 
tangible and very positive sign of increased interest in thei r work on the development assistance 
aspects of cott on. 
5.8.  At the 29 November meeting of th e Mechanism, three projects had been  presented by the C -4 
within the broader framework of their cotton roadmap project, submitted in document 
WT/CFMC/W/73. Five other pr oject-focused presentations had been  delivered by n ational cooperation 
agencies and international partners, as well as by the private sector.  
5.9.  He noted that the work of the Mechanism had become more methodical  with s everal suggestions 
from Members  including for instance enhancing the focus on project effect iveness through an 
expansion of the Evolving Table to include qualitative information on the results achieved by projects 
and further details related to donors and partners.  
5.10.   He strongly encourage d Members, in particular those with a variety of smaller pro jects in the 
pipeline or on -going, to notify them to the Secretariat for proper inclu sion in the Evolving Table. That  
would greatly enhance transparency and further reinforce the role of the Evolving Table as an open 
tool to access updated project informat ion. 
5.11.   The 29 November meeting of the Mechanism had also seen a dedicated technica l session on 
cotton by -products  at the conclusion of which Members had given  a mandate to the secretariats of the 
WTO, UNCTAD and ITC to develop substantive work on the issue of cotton by -products.  
5.12.   Cotton by -products value chains present ed untapped potential for growth in LDCs and 
developing countries, particu larly in Africa. It also appeared  that cotton by -products present ed a 
potential for fostering local transformation and generating additional revenue in those countries.  
Moreover, cotton by -products was an area of work that was  expanding ra pidly at the global level, and 
he encourage d tho se types of pragmatic approaches as positive examples of results -oriented WTO 
cooperation.  
5.13.   On behalf of the Director -General, he paid tribute to the Members of th e development 
community who had  provided updates for the Evolving Table in the two revisions of 2018: Brazil, 
Canada, Colombia, the European Union , Germany, India, Japan, New Zealand, Switzerland,  Turkey 
and the United States. He also commend ed Brazil, China, India and Pakistan for thei r significant 
contributions on the platform of South -South Co -operation for Cotton Development Assistance. The 
continued support from several multilateral institutions, such as the Common Fund for Commodities 
(CFC), the UN Food and Agriculture Organization  (FAO), the International Cotton Advisory Committee 
(ICAC), the International Trade Centre (ITC), the United Nations Conference on Trade and 
Developmen t (UNCTAD) and the World Bank, wa s also greatly appreciated.  
5.14.   The sustained engagement of all the partners  in cotton development assistance was very 
encouraging. That wa s a particularly positive area of W TO cooperation where results could  generate 
an immediate and positive impact  for millions of people in cotton -producing developing countries and 
LDCs.  
5.15.   The rep resentative of the Central African Republic , on behalf of the LDCs , said that cotton wa s 
a real driver of development and was  an essential source of income, contrib uting to the food security 
of the LDC populations. Cotton remained  undeniably strategic and vital for LDCs as it contributed  
significantly to agricultural production, th e economy, trade and employment and wa s an indisputable 
lever in the fight against poverty  particularly in rural areas.  
5.16.   With that in mind, in 2003, Benin, Burkina Faso, Mali and C had, all LDCs, tabled a negotiating 
proposal at the WTO entitled " Poverty Reduction: Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton " which aimed 
at bringing Me mbers through negotiation to reach a consensual, fair and lasting solution to the thorny 
issue o f domest ic support that distorted  the international cotton market.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 17 - 
 
  5.17.   Despite  the long duration of the cotton negotiations and the sacrifi ces made, no viable solution 
had yet been achi eved and unfortunately the Eleventh Ministerial Conference had  not been able to 
take an important and concrete decision on cotton.  
5.18.   It was also important to note that in terms of trade, cot ton cultivation in the LDCs would  still 
suffer from its mod est size on a global scale. It wa s therefore  important to increase productivity 
through a re al policy of industrialization and structural transformation.  
5.19.   In addition, the LDCs  endorse d the C -4 Ministers' Declaration at their meeting held on 
16 November in N'Djamena, Chad. The LDCs  called on all stakeholders to follow a logic of flexibility 
with a view to achieving a co ncrete and measurable result and  hoped that strong enco uraging signals 
could drive thei r discussions in the WTO to a successful conclusion  of the cotton issue by the Twelfth  
Ministerial Conference.  
5.20.   The LDC Group welcomed  the initiative of the "Cotton Route" program and urged development 
partners to continue their support for the effective implementation of the program and other future 
programs and projects.  
5.21.   The representative  of the European Union  thanked the Secretariat for the re ports produced and  
seized the opportunity under that agenda item to stress that his delegation  would welcome m ore 
transparency. Concretely, the European Union  urged those Members that provide d aid to  report on it 
in full transparency  and without delay. The EU recall ed what it had explained to its  African partners 
that any furt her development assistance should  be aligned with comprehensive African national or 
regional policies and priorities and should  be included in the dialogue partnership programmes with 
the European Union. In ot her words, the European Union was  ready to assist provided cotton was  
identified as a priority important value chain by the government of th e country in question – all that  
in complementary and coherence with the South -South dialogue.  
5.22.   In the context of future work, the European Union  welcome d it and confirm ed its  support for a 
work programme on cotton bi -products. In accordance with the Nairobi Decis ion, the European Union 
provided  duty-free and quota -free access for cotton bi -products from the LDCs and was  the biggest 
importer of those products among developed countries.  
5.23.   The representative of Mali, on behalf of the C -4, welcomed  the statement made by the Deputy 
Director -Gener al regarding the development assistance  aspects of cotton. Progress had  been made in 
the sector since the last Director -General's report in November 2017. The C -4 which had  benefited 
from specific development assistance thank ed the different partners who had helped the  group to 
meet its different objectives.  
5.24.   Regarding the projects mention ed under item 6 of the agenda of  the thirteenth  meeting of the 
Consultative Framework, the C -4 had decided to contribute  to the WTO reg arding the development 
assistance aspects of cotton. The C -4 had therefore put forward three projects at the 2 9 November 
meeting of the Mechanism  in the more general framework of the " Cotton Route ". Those developments 
had been made possible thanks to the support of both Members and Partner s. The C -4 reiterate d its 
willingness and commitmen t to work together with Members and Partners to be able to implement t he 
different projects which had  been mentioned.  
5.25.   The C -4 wished  the General Council success and fruitful deliberations.  
5.26.   The representati ve of Turkey  noted that cotton had  played a central role in the economi c 
development of many countries including Turkey and still maintained  its econ omic and social 
importance for many developing M embers.  
5.27.   In that  sense, the development assistance aspect s of cotton had special importance in the 
developmental objectives of trade  and the role of the WTO in that  process.  
5.28.   The intensive exchanges they had during the "Cotton Days" in November had provided them  
again with an opportunity to review the developments in the cotton sector and the ongoing cotton 
development projects. Turkey had also shared in that event its  experience on value addition to cotton.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 18 - 
 
  5.29.   Turkey strongly support ed the continuation of that  very useful process in the coming years and 
believe d that the M embership should double its efforts for further strengthening the efficiency of the 
development assistance aspects of  cotton to increase the participation of the cotton producing LDCs 
in world trade.  
5.30.   The General Council took note  of the Deputy Directo r-General's statement and of the other 
statements.  
6  APPELLATE BODY APPOI NTMENTS – AMENDMENTS  OF THE DISPUTE SETT LEMENT 
UNDERSTANDING  
6.1  Statement by t he European Union, China, Canada, Norway, New Zealand, Sw itzerland, 
Australia, Republic o f Korea, Iceland, Singapore, Mexico, Costa Rica And Montenegro  
6.2  Communication from the European Union, China, Canada, India, Norway, New Zealand, 
Switzerland, Australia, Republic of Korea, Iceland, Singapore, Mexico, Costa Rica and 
Montenegro (WT/GC/W/752/Rev .2) 
6.3  Communicatio n from the European Union, China, India and Montenegro  
(WT/GC/W/753/Rev .1) 
6.1.  The Chairman  said that there were three sub -items under that  agenda item. He recognis ed that 
each of the three sub -items had  a different li st of sponsoring delegations.  
6.2.  Concerning s ub-item (a), it was  a statement by the European Union, China, Canada, Norway, 
New Zealand, Switzerland, Australia, the Republic of Korea, Ice land, Singapore and Mexico. He also 
understood that it had  also been co -sponsored by C osta Rica and Montenegro . 
6.3.  Regarding sub -item (b), it was a communication circulated in document WT/GC/W/752/Rev.2 
sponsored by the European Union, China, Canada, India, Norway, New Zealand, Switzerland, 
Australia, the Republic of Korea, Iceland, Singapore Me xico, Costa Rica and Mon tenegro.   
6.4.  With respect to sub -item (c): it was a communication circulated in document 
WT/GC/W/753/Rev.1 sponsored by the European Union, China, India and Montenegro.  
6.5.  The representative of the European Union  said that in relation to sub -item (a), the joint  statement 
would  be circulated as a General Council  document6. The co -sponsors of that statement  reaffirm ed 
their commitment to the rules -based multilateral trading system.  
6.6.  In particular, t hey underscore d the dispute settlement system as a central pillar of the WTO. An 
effective dis pute settlement system preserved  the rights and obligations of WTO Members, and 
ensured  that the rules we re enforceable. Such a s ystem wa s also essential in building confidence 
amongst M ember s in the negotiating pillar. They we re deeply concerned that continued vacancies in 
the Appellate Body present ed a risk to the WTO system as a whole. They therefore emphasised the 
urgent need to unblock the appointment of Appellate Body members.  
6.7.  They acknowledge d that concerns had  been raised about the functioning of the  dispute 
settlement system and we re ready to work on possible solutions, while preserving the essential 
features of the system and of its A ppellate Body. To that  end, and with the objective of unblocking 
the appoint ments o f the Appellate Body swiftly, they had  submitted concrete proposals to the Genera l 
Council. Given the urgency, they  called on all Members to fill the vacancies on the Appellate Body and 
to devise solutions based on the proposed amendments to the Und erstanding on Rules and Procedures 
Governing the Settlement o f Disputes ("DSU") attached to C ommunication WT/GC/W/752 as soon as 
possible.  
6.8.  They also acknowledge d that concerns had  in addition been raised about the interpretations 
developed by the Appellat e Body on certa in matters (so -called issue of " overreach"). Without prejudice 
                                                
6 The Joint Statement by t he Europea n Union, China, Canada, Norway, New Zealand, Switzerland , Australia, 
Republic of Korea, Iceland,  Singapore, Mexico, Costa Rica a nd Monte negro was subsequently circulated in 
document WT/GC/197.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 19 - 
 
  to their respective positions on those matters, they pointed out that t he substantive rules as such 
could  be modified or interpreted by the WTO Membership in accordance with the relevant procedures. 
They also stood ready  to engage in discussions on such possible changes to the rules or authoritative 
interpretations, and call ed on interested Members to advance ideas on how to take that  process 
forward.  
6.9.  Concerning sub -item (b), t he European Union introduce d the proposed amendments to the 
Dispute Settlement Understanding contained in the c ommunication to the G eneral Council 
WT/GC/W/752. That communication wa s co-sponsored by the European Union, China, Canada, India, 
Norway, New Zealan d, Switzerland, Australia, the Republic of Korea,  Iceland, Singapore, Mexico, Costa 
Rica and Montenegro.  
6.10.   As had been set out in the introduction to the communication, the co -sponsors we re deeply 
concerned that the enduring absence of consensus in the DSB to fill the vacan cies on the Appellate 
Body risked  undermining the viability of the WTO dispute settlement system.  
6.11.   The co -sponsors acknowledge d the successful contribution of the dispute settlement system to 
the security and predictability of the multilat eral trading system. They recognise d the essential role of 
the Appellate Bo dy within the system that served  to preserve the rights and obligations of Members, 
and to clarify the existing provisions of those agreements without adding to or diminishing the r ights 
and obligations provided therein.  
6.12.   At the same time, the co -sponsors acknowledge d that concerns had  been raised about the 
functioning of the  dispute settlement system and we re ready to work on solutions, while preserving 
the essential features of the  system and the Appellate Body.  
6.13.   To that end, the co -sponsors call ed on all Members to fill the vacancies on the Appellate Body 
and to amend certain provisions of the DSU. The proposed amendments aim ed at improving the DSU 
while a ddressing the concerns tha t had been raised on tho se issues.   
6.14.   The European Union wished to briefly go through tho se issues and the proposed amendments.  
6.15.   First, concerns had  been expres sed that the Appellate Body did  not have the authority to deem 
someone who was  not an Appellate Bo dy member to be a member, which wa s associated  with the so -
called R ule 15.  
6.16.   On that question, it was proposed that a transitional rule for ou tgoing Appellate Body members 
be adopted by the WTO Membership itself through an amendment of the DSU.  
6.17.   Second, conc erns had  been expressed with the timelines for appellate proceedings and with the 
absence of consultation of the parties when the 90 -day timeframe provided for in Article 17.5 of the 
DSU wa s exceeded and with the alleged lack of transparency.  
6.18.   On that issue, it was proposed to amend the 90 -day rule in Article 17.5 of the DSU by providing 
an enhanced consultation and transparency obligation for the Appellate Body and a mechanism to 
ensur e that the 90 -day timeframe would be met if the parties did  not agre e to extend it.  
6.19.   Third, concerns had  been expressed with the Appellate Body review of panel findings as to the 
meaning of domestic legislation.  
6.20.   On that question, it wa s proposed to clarify that issues of law covered in the panel report and 
legal interpreta tions developed by the panel, in the meaning of Art icle 17.6 of the DSU, did  not include 
the meaning itself of the municipal measures.  
6.21.   Fourth, concerns had  been ra ised that the Appellate Body had  a tendency to make findings on 
issues not necessary to reso lve a dispute.  
6.22.   On that issue, it wa s proposed to amend Article 17.12 of the DSU to provi de that the Appellate 
Body should  address each of the issues raised on appeal by the parties to the dispute to the extent 
that was necessary for the resolution of the dispute.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 20 - 
 
  6.23.   Fifth, concerns had  been expressed with the Appellate Body's approach to treat its own reports 
effect ively as precedent that panels we re to follow absent "cogent reasons".  
6.24.   On that issue, it wa s proposed that annual meetings be  held between the Ap pellate Body and 
WTO Members in the DSB. That  would provide an additional "channel of communication" where 
concerns with regard to some Appellate Body approaches, systemic issues or trends in the 
jurisprudence could be voiced. Adequate transparency and gro und rules for such meetings would need 
to be put in place in order to avoid undue pressure on Appellate Body members.  
6.25.   In view of the urgency of the matter, and in order to allow for the Appellate Body appointments 
to be taken swiftly, the co -sponsors prop osed that tho se amendments be adopted by the Genera l 
Council as soon as possible.  
6.26.   Regarding sub -item (c), the European Union introduce d the proposed amendments to the 
Dispute Settlement Understanding contained in the c ommunication to the G eneral Council 
WT/GC/W/753. That communication was  co-sponsored b y the European Union, China, India and 
Montenegro .  
6.27.   The co -sponsors acknowledge d that concerns had  been raised about the functioning of the  
dispute settlement system and we re ready to work on solutions on the  basis of the proposal to amend 
provisions of the DSU attached to document WT/GC/W/ 752 discussed before under sub -item (b) .  
6.28.    At the same time, in order to achieve balance and taking into account the experience with the 
application of the DSU to date, the co-sponsors consider ed that tho se amendments should be 
accompanied by additional amendments covered under sub-item (c). Tho se additional amendments 
aimed at strengthening the independence and impartiality of the Appellate Body, improving efficiency 
so as t o enable it to meet the required timeframes, and ensuring an orderly transition as well as an 
orderly launch of selection procedures.  
6.29.   The European Union briefly went through tho se proposed additional amendments.  
6.30.   First, it wa s proposed to provide for one single but longer (6 -8 years) term for Appellat e Body 
members. The objective was  to enhance the independence of the Appella te Body and its members, 
which wa s needed in view of the experience of recent years and also in view of the other amendments 
proposed  in the document under sub -item (b) . 
6.31.   Second, in addition to the amendment proposed on the issue of 90 days, the co -sponsors 
propose d certain amendments aiming at improving the efficiency of the Appellate Body and enabling 
it to me et the required timeframes . That included  increasing the number of Appellate Body members 
to nine and providing that the M embership of the Appellate Body was a full -time job.  
6.32.   Third, in order to ensure an orderly transition between the outgoing and new Appellate Body 
members, the c o-sponsors propose d that the outgoing Appellate Body members should continue 
discharging thei r duties until their places had  been filled , but not for longer than a two -year period.  
6.33.   Fourth, the co -sponsors propose d to clarify that the selection process to replace outgoing 
Appell ate Body members should  be automatically launched by the DSB Chair in advance of the expiry 
of the term of office of the outgoing member.  
6.34.   The European Union called  on all Members to engage i n a dedicated process under the 
Chairman's  auspices on the basis of the textual propos als so that the crisis in the Appellate Body could  
be solved swiftly.  
6.35.   The representative of Singapore  intervened on  sub-items (a) and (b). The workload faced  by 
the Appe llate Body continued  to increase the small appeals filed even as the number of Appellate Body 
members continued to decrease by attrition. With the WTO Dispute Settlement Mechanism coming 
under more strained  than ever, Singapore reiterated  its systemic conc erns over the situation and 
called  for the Appellate Body vacancies to be filled without delay. Any concerns about the funct ioning 
of the Appellate Body could  be discussed separately and in parallel.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 21 - 
 
  6.36.   As a lack of proposals could  have impe ded engagement on  discussing those concerns, Singapore 
was supportive of proposals for the Membership to engage concretely on finding solutions. Hence, for  
instance, Singapore appreciated  Honduras' efforts in tabling a paper on fostering a discussion on issues 
relating to Rule 15 at the recent DSB meetings.  In the same spirit, Singapore wa s a co -sponsor of 
sub-items (a) and (b) primarily because it  regard ed them as a means to kickstart focused discussions 
among the Membership on the issues covered and which hopefully could contribute to unblocking the 
Appellate Body Selection impasse as soon as possible.  
6.37.   The representative of Montenegro  said that a dministering the Understanding on Rules and 
Procedures Governi ng the Settlement of Disputes was widely recognis ed as one of the m ost successful 
functions of the organization. P reserving the system and improving the rules in order to make the 
work of the Appellate Body more effective was therefore  of high importance for the international trade 
community.  
6.38.   In that regard , Montenegro s upport ed the communication of the European Union and other 
Members submitted to the General Council as a way forwar d to improve the d ispute settlement 
mechanism and to have a fully operational Appellate Body.  
6.39.   Montenegro remained  fully committed to strength ening the mult ilateral trading system and 
remained ready to contribute to  the activities towards overcoming the current global trade challenges.  
6.40.   The representative of Norway  said that a  well-functioning disput e settlement system in the WTO 
was essential.  
6.41.   Norway wa s deeply concerned about the present blockage of the process to fill vacan cies on 
the Appellate Body. It wa s imperative that those vacancies be  filled expeditiously.  
6.42.   At the same time, Norway recognised the concerns raised by M embers in relation to  the 
functioning o f the Appellate Body. Even if Norway did  not share those concerns, it was  willing to listen 
and engage in a conversation  about those concerns. That was why Norway was among the co -sponsors 
of the joint statement that the European Union ha d introduced under sub-item (a). That was also the 
reason why Norway  had decided to co -sponsor the commu nication presented under sub -item (b) . 
6.43.   Norway hoped that, by submitting proposed amendments of certain provisions of the DSU, the 
co-sponsors would enab le Members to start a substantive discussi on to address concerns that had  
been raised such as the issues of 90 days and precedent.  
6.44.   Norway encouraged all M embers to engage in a di alogue on those and other concerns and  would 
like to h ear about and learn from  other Members'  assessment of the situation. It was  only by talkin g 
to one another, explaining their  perspectives and looking for solutions that were acceptable to all that 
they would  be able to make progress and resolve the current crisis.  
6.45.   In that regard,  any solution should not jeopardis e the integrity of the dispute settlement 
system.  
6.46.   The representative of Australia  aligned  itself with the joint s tatement under sub-item (a)  and 
confirmed  its co -sponsorship of the com munication referred to in sub -item (b). 
6.47.   Like many others , Australia wa s disappointed that, for 20 months, progress to agree a process 
to make much needed appointments t o the Appellate Body had eluded Members .   
6.48.   During that time, the Appellate Body's caseload had grown while the number of vac ancies on 
the Appellate Body had  also increased.   
6.49.   At the same time, Australia had  heard the concerns raised regarding the functioning of the WTO 
dispu te settlement system and was  committed to engaging with interested Members in a discussion 
to explore optio ns for addressing such concerns.  
6.50.   The proposal set out in docu ment WT/GC/W/752/Rev.2, which Australia had co -sponsored, wa s 
a critical and concrete step towards addressin g many of the concerns that had  been raised.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 22 - 
 
  6.51.   Australia remained  committed to such efforts and invite d all Members to join so that they could  
move forward together and find ways to ensure the ongoing integrity and functioning of thei r valued 
dispute settlement system.   
6.52.   The representative of New Zealand  was pleased to su pport the joint statement presented by 
the European  Union  on behalf of New Zealand and ten other Members  as well as the communication 
in WT/GC/W/ 752. 
6.53.   New Zealand wa s a staunch supporter of the multila teral dispute settlement system and had  
repeatedly empha sised the importance of looking to find solutions to the current impasse through 
discussions among Members.  
6.54.   New Zealand recognised and shared  many of the concerns that had  been expressed on the 
operation of the Appellate Body.  
6.55.   As referenced in the statemen t, and with the issue  also separately adva nced by some Members 
in the next agenda item, New Zealand was  also open to engage in discussions on possible changes to 
the substantive rules or authoritative interpretations to address other concerns relating to 
interpretations developed by the Appellate Bo dy on certain matters – which had  been described as 
the issue of "overreach" . 
6.56.   New Zealand remained  open to a solution focu sed discussion in any format Members would 
wish to propose to take tho se matters forward.   
6.57.   The representative of India intervened  on sub -items (b) and (c). On sub -item (b), the existential  
crisis facing the Appellate Body was India's  gravest concern. A n indepen dent dispute settlement 
system wa s imperative for the fair enfor cement of the rules of international trade. The impending 
paralysis and possible disappea rance of the Appellate Body would  be a fatal blow to the credibility of 
the WTO. Without the system of enforcement of existing rules, the appetite for making new rules  of 
reforms would be poor. A n expeditious resolution of th e Appellate Body crisis should therefore  be at 
the top of the agenda in the coming wee ks and months.  
6.58.   In the WTO, it wa s expected that the Member who had  a specific concern on an issue would 
advance possible opti ons on how to address it. Members currently found them selves in the unique 
position where the Member who had  issues with the functioning of the Appellate Body had  failed to 
put forward a single proposal to address their often-repeated concerns. In that context, India thank ed 
the European Union for taking the initiative for tabling  concrete textual proposals to ad dress the 
concerns that had  been raised by the United States in the US President's Trade Policy Agenda of 2018 
and that had been reiterated in multiple DSB meetings.  
6.59.   India was  a co-sponsor of the proposal contained in document  WT/GC/W/752. The proposal 
sought  to unblock the appointments of the Appellate Body  by tackling the procedural concerns raised 
by the United States. Once appointments to the Appellate Body had  been unblocked, WTO Members 
could engage in discussions on the complex substantive issue of rule -making by WTO panels and the 
Appellate Body . In view of the urgency of the situation, India  fully support ed that calibrated approach 
and hoped that the United States would  engage in good faith on the specific e lements of the proposals 
in that  document which respond ed to the stated concerns with the functioning of the Appellate Body.  
6.60.   India had  made an honest at tempt to come up with concrete suggestions to address the  
concerns articulated by the United States.  In order to build tru st amongst the Membership, it wa s 
important to engage on tho se proposals without putt ing any pre -condition or linking tho se to other 
areas of the WTO's function.  
6.61.   On sub -item (c), India was also mindful of the shared responsibility of all WTO Members to 
strengthen and improve the functioning of the WTO di spute settlement system as a who le. In t hat 
context, India co -sponsored  the proposal  contained in WT/GC/W/753 that sought  to improve the 
efficiency of the Appellate Body to enable it to meet requi red timeframes for appeals. That proposal 
also aimed  to ensure an automatic launch of the AB Selection Process and an orderly transition of 
persons serving on the Appellate Body to avert a recurrence of a crisis such as the one that Members 
currently confronted. Those additional amendments we re important for  ensuring that the system 
served  the interest of all WTO Members.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 23 - 
 
  6.62.   Those proposals we re mea nt as a starting point to begin an open, inclusive and expeditious 
process for unblocking the AB appointments and improvin g the functioning of the WTO. India  urged 
the Chairman  to consider establishing a process to examine all present and future textual pr oposals 
from Members with a view to achievi ng a prompt resolution of the Appellate Body  impasse.  
6.63.   The representative of Costa Rica  said that p reserving th e multilateral trading system was  vital 
for Costa Rica . The dispute settlement system was a fundamental  pillar of the organization and 
ensured  the legal certainty o f rights and obligations in the WTO and the predictability of international 
trade. Costa Rica  consequently share d the concern raised regarding  the current situation of the 
Appellate  Body. In orde r to deal with that situation, Costa Rica had  decided to co -sponsor two 
proposals  that sought  to address the concerns expressed about its functioning.  
6.64.   Regarding the proposal in WT/GC/W/752, which Costa Rica was  co-sponsoring with several 
delegations , it share d the view of those who believe d it was  necessary to respond to some of the 
concerns expressed about the functioning of the di spute settlement system. In that  regard, Costa Rica 
would like to contribute to that pragmatically and responsibly  by puttin g forward and supporting 
solutions that respect ed the system's fundamental characteristics and help ed preserve its role as a 
key pillar of the o rganization.  
6.65.   The representative of China  thanked and supported  the statement made by the European Union. 
As one of the joint proponents, China share d two comments  which cover ed sub-items (a), (b) and (c). 
6.66.   First, the joint proposal by the E uropean Union, China and other Members aimed  to respond to 
and address a particular Member's concerns on the A ppellate process, to maintain and strengthen the 
independence and impartiality of the Appellate Body, to promote text -based substantia l discussions 
among WTO Members  and to launch the select ion process for  Appellate Body  members as soon as 
possible.  
6.67.   The crisis of the Appell ate Body had  lasted for more than a year without any silver lining . The 
Member had flagged its concerns over the Appellate process without providing  concrete s uggestions 
or solutions. If that issue remained  unresolved, the Appellate Body would  cease to fun ction after next 
year. The selection of Appellate Body m embers had  become an imminent  crisis facing the WTO and 
needed  to be reso lved at the earliest time. As the  ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius had said, " laws 
alone cannot carry themselves into practice."  As the dispute settlement mechanism was the core pillar 
of the  WTO, more than forty Members including the European Union and China had  collectively 
submitted the joint proposal aiming to prom ote the substantive discussions  so as to facilitate th e crisis 
of the Appellate Body to be solved without any delay.  
6.68.   Second, China c alled on all Members to actively engage in the discussions and consultations, 
and to strive to reach consensus as soon as possible. As India had said, the joint proposal marked  a 
beginning rather than the end of the final result. China urged  the Chairman of th e General Council to 
actively facilitate  the discussi ons and begin the consultations after the meeting so that the momentum 
could be maintained through an  appropriate mechani sm. 
6.69.   Safeguarding the dispute settlement mechanism and the multilateral tradin g system wa s the 
shared responsibility of all Members and served  the common interest of the whole Membership. China 
hoped that every Member  could vigorously participate in the spi rit of constructive cooperation, take 
positive and pragmatic actions to solve the crisis of the Appellate Body as soon as possible, safeguard 
the well -functioning of the dispute settlement mechanism by collective efforts, and maintain the 
authoritativeness  and effectiveness of the multil ateral trading system. China looked forward to 
furthering that work with all Members.  
6.70.   The representative of Switzerland  welcomed  the fact that issues regarding the dispute 
settlement system were raised at the General Council  – illustrating  the urgency of the situation and 
the wil lingness of Members to engage in  safeguard ing and strengthen ing one of the essential pillars 
of the multilateral trading system. Like many ot her Members, Switzerland regretted  the fact that the 
vacanc ies within the Appellate Body had  not yet been filled.  
6.71.   Switzerland thank ed the European Union for its engage ment and its statement which had been 
made on  behalf of the co -sponsors. The joint statement highlighted two aspects. First, concerns had  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 24 - 
 
  been expr essed on the dispute sett lement system; and second, the communication in WT/GC/ W/752 
co-sponsored by Switzerland wa s a basis for future discussion.  
6.72.   Holding open and constructive discussions both on the con tent of the changes proposed and  on 
the format that  those could  take was fundamental. The amendments that had been proposed which 
were princi pally procedural in nature sought  to improve the functioning and the efficacy and 
effectiveness of the dispute settlement system within which the Appellate Body  playe d an essential 
role. 
6.73.   The different communications which appear ed on the meeting's agenda bore  witness to a shared 
willingness to engage in dia logue and to find solutions. Tho se communications provide d a broad base 
for moving forward and should contribute to an open and inclusive process in order to discuss  the 
different points which had  been raised and to work in favour of finding c oncrete solutions. Switzerland 
would also be glad to hear any other pos sible pro posals from Members and remained  ready to engage 
in a constructive manner to implement such a process and in material d iscussions that would allow 
that. Switzerland also called on all Members to do the same.  
6.74.   The representative of Mexico  intervened  on sub -items (a) and (b). As had  been said on several 
occasions, the dispute  settlement system at the WTO was an essential element that gave  certainty 
and predictabil ity to its Members – and the Appellate Body was its cornerstone . It should therefore be 
a priority for all Members  to guarantee its full functioning which could be done by ensuring that the 
Appellate Body had seven members.  
6.75.   Over the past 18 months, Members had not been able to fill the vacancies in the Appellate 
Body. Mexico was therefore  seriously concerned and repeat ed its call to all Members to act in a 
responsible way in confronting the situation they were faced with and in restoring an essential pillar 
which represented  both certainty and tru st for the other pillars of the  organization.  
6.76.   Members found themselves in a very complex scenario – being  in front of a Gordian knot. While 
an opposition to start the necessary processes to fill the vacancies of the A ppellate Body existed based 
on several concerns, Members we re also faced  with the need to engage everyone in the process to 
enable them  to discuss the problems raised and overcome them.  
6.77.   As co -sponsors of the joint statement and the communication in W T/GC/W /752 presented by 
the European Unio n which provided possible solutions to the concerns raised, Mexico welcomed them 
and support ed a discussion including on the additi onal proposals presented in the meeting which 
sought  to improve the disput e settlement system and to adapt  it to the needs of the current times 
while maintaining th e fundamental  principles of the  organi zation. Mexico  urged those who had  raised 
specific concerns to seriously consider the proposals which demonstrate d the openness of the rest of 
the Membership to discuss and to seek solution s to those concerns.  
6.78.   As had already been suggested by 71 Members many times at the DSB, Mexico  reiterated  the 
need to start the Selection Process to fill the current vacancies  in the Appellate Body and  express ed 
its support for the statement that Argentina would  be making on behalf of the Group o f Latin American 
Countries stress ing thei r readiness to work in a constructive way with the vi ew to finding a solution to 
that important issue.  
6.79.   The representative of Canada  said that t he effective functioning of the d ispute settlement 
system remained  a key  priority for Canada in discussions on WTO Reform.  
6.80.   Canada confirmed  its support to the statement made by the European Union with respect to 
sub-item (b) and to the communication in document W T/GC/W /752/Rev.2 which it co-sponsor ed. The 
package of DSU amend ments that wa s set out in the communicati on provided  a positive approach to 
addres sing specific concerns that had  been raised by Members about certain aspects of the functioning 
of the dispute settlement system.  
6.81.   Canada  remain ed deeply concerned  about the c ontinued vacancies i n the Appellate Body and 
urged the immediate lau nch of the selection processes to unblock the impasse and ensure the effective 
functionin g of the Appellate Body. To that  end, collect ive engagement by all Members was  crucial.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 25 - 
 
  6.82.   As the host  of the group of Ministers that  had met in Ottawa at the end of October and  had 
affirmed their readiness to work constructively on safeguarding and strengthening the dispute 
settlement system, Canada stood  ready to move ahead to achieve that shared objecti ve and looked 
forward to hearing the views of others on the package of DSU Amendments as set out in 
WT/GC/W/752/Rev.2. Canada strongly encourage d all Members to contribute to  the dispute 
settlement reform effo rts including by engaging on those amendments a nd remained open to 
continuing tho se discussions in a ny suggested format.  
6.83.   The representative of  the Republic of Korea  intervened on  sub-items (a) and (b). Korea 
appreciated the efforts by the European Union  in preparing and leading the joint statement and the 
communications.  
6.84.   Following  previous speakers , Korea shared its deep concerns on the continued vacancies in the 
Appellate Body and the sense of urgency fo r filling them without delay. Korea  urged Members to 
engage in the discussions on the concerns rais ed by some Members as soon as possible based on the 
communications a nd the joint statement presented that day and remained ready to engage actively 
and in a constructive manner on future discussions.  
6.85.   Concerning sub -item (a), Korea  co-sponsor ed that joint statement and emphasised  the nee d 
for prompt discussions on "overreach" . The successful handling of that issue would  be essential  for 
winning the support of the Membership as a whole for the Appellate Body which would  in turn enable 
the Appellate Body to p erform its functions in a stabl e manner. Korea also appreciated and fully 
supported  the efforts put forward by Australia, Singapore, Switzerland, Costa Rica and Canada under 
the following agenda item.  
6.86.   Regarding sub-item (b), Korea also co -sponsored  that co mmunication  in the s pirit of active 
engagement. That communication provided  constructive proposals and possible alternatives for 
resolving concerns raised by certain Members especially focusing on the operational and the 
procedural a spects of the Appellate  Body. Korea  expect ed that the proposals laid out in those 
communications would  be used for further discussions and be improve d as appropriate at the follow 
up discussions.  
6.87.   The representative of Iceland  was a co-sponsor of the joint stateme nt under sub -item (a) and  
the comm unication under sub -item (b). Iceland was concerned about the  challenges faced by the WTO 
and strongly support ed the multilateral rules -based trading system and its contribution to the stabilit y 
of the global economy where  the dispute set tlement system played  an important role.  
6.88.   Members had  a responsibility to safeguard and preserve the Appellate Body, the dispute 
settlement system and the multi lateral trading system. It was therefore their duty to proceed with the 
launch ing of the Selectio n Process for Appellate Body members.   
6.89.   Iceland hoped that the proposal would help Members  come to an agreement on how to fulfil 
their duties. Since they did not have much time, it was important for them to start thei r discussion s 
soon.  
6.90.   The representative of the Philippines  intervened  on sub -items  (a), (b) and (c). The Philippines 
had been following with serious interest the disc ussions in the DSB and in the General Council  on the 
Appellate Body crisis. A great majo rity of the Membership believed that the crisis had reached a point 
where  the existence of  the dispute settlement system was under serious threat.  
6.91.   Over the pas t meetings of the DSB and the General Council, the Philippines had  heard the 
growing clamour from the rest of the Membership particularly  from the sponsors of 
WT/DSB/W/609/Rev.6 to launch the AB Selection Process without delay.  
6.92.   The Philippines had  also heard loud and clear the concerns of the United State s over the 
functioning of the Appellate Body  and by extension , the WTO dispute settleme nt mechanism. The 
United States had outlined in gre at detail time and again in the General Council and in the DSB how 
it believed that the Appellate Body had  not been followin g its own rules and how it viewed that  situation 
as effecti vely usurping the powe rs of the General Council  and the Ministerial Conference.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 26 - 
 
  6.93.   The proposals in WT/GC/W/ 752 and WT/GC/W/753 had  been placed on the agenda of the 
General Council as a s traightforward response aimed at the problems with the DSU identified by the 
United States. Wi th the submissions of the proposals in WT/GC/W/752 and WT/GC/W/753 , the 
Philippines hoped that the  General Council and Members could  start with the real work and stop talking 
past each other. The Philippines  urged all Members to begin with the serious and difficult task of 
strengthening and improving the WTO's dispute settlement system.  
6.94.   The Philippines was  not a co -sponsor of the proposals in WT/GC/W/752 and WT/GC/W/753  and 
was also not a signatory to the communication  in WT/DSB/W/609/Rev.6 . The Philippines  had not 
expressed support for or opposition to the concerns raised by the U nited States regarding the dispute 
settlement system and continue d to carefully study all the views on tho se issues as had been 
expressed by Members who had spoken on tho se issues.  
6.95.   The Philippines' approach was to attempt to view tho se different positions through a rational 
and impartial lens . In the same way that the dispute settlement system wa s designed to maintain a 
proper balance between the rights and obl igations of Members, s o too should Members  strive to 
achieve a proper balance in discussing t he different proposals that sought  to improve that same 
system. In that regard, the Philippines looked  forward to participating in any General Council -led 
process to come up with soluti ons to the critica l issues being faced by the dispute settlement system 
through a pragmatic, balanced and objective approach.  
6.96.   The Philippines  thank ed the proponents of WT/GC/W/752 and WT/GC/W/753 as well as 
WT/GC/W/754 for their concrete contribution to that critical debate on the reform of the dispute 
settlement system and Honduras for its  constructive contributions to address the Rule 15 issue. The 
Philippines  also thank ed the Unite d States for having voiced its concerns on the Appellate Body  and 
the proper functioning of the dispute settlement mechanism. The Philippines  appreciate d Members 
who had  spoken about their commitment to prese rving and strengthening what had  often been 
described as the crown jewel of the rules -based multilateral trad ing system and urged all Members to 
respond constructively and collectively in solidarity in the General Council and begin thei r task in 
earnest.  
6.97.   The representative of Antigua and Barbuda  said that the dispute settlement mechanism wa s an 
integral part of t he multilat eral trading system which  ensure d transparency, security and predictability 
of global trade.  
6.98.   The experience of Antigua and Barbuda, a small vulnerable economy , concerning the WTO 
dispute settlement system with respect to gaining compliance on t he rulings and recommendations of 
the DSB in DS285: United States – Measures Affecting the Cross -Border Supply of Gaming and Betting 
Services however elucidated the limits and inequities of the Dispute Settlement U nderstanding.  
6.99.   Its experience allowed it  to speak with a measure of authority on  the issue and its concerns 
were multi -fold.  
6.100.   For Antigua and Barbuda , the high cost of participation from a financial and hum an resources 
perspective remained  a blatant constraint especially for small , vulnerable econ omies like it – 
intensifying the urgency to find effective remedies.  
6.101.   It was time for the honourable house to recognise the limited ability of the  small economies 
to find effective and practical redress under the current construct to attain effective enfor cement of 
rulings.  
6.102.   While the rea sons behind the current crisis we re of a specific provenance, the current impasse 
with respect to the  appointment of Appellate Body members had  raised a num ber of pressing issues 
that should  be addressed and resolved by the WTO M embership.  
6.103.   The required revamping should not only take into acc ount the issues related to the Appellate 
Body but equally important  – the effective enforcement of rulings and recommendations especially 
when the economic fall -out of non -compliance  was catastrophic.  
6.104.   That wa s pertinent if  the dispute settlement system wa s to salvage its already fragile 
legitimacy.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 27 - 
 
  6.105.   Antigua and Barbuda had  been following closely the recent discussions and proposals 
regarding procedural and substantive improvements to the  dispute settlement system.  
6.106.   While Antigua and Barbuda  remain ed disappointed in the failure of the system to provide 
effecti ve relief, it reiterate d its strong support for the multilateral trading system, the WTO legal 
acquis, and the need for adherence to and compliance with WTO rules.   
6.107.   As a small , vulnerable economy, Antigua and Barbuda  consider ed that respect for those rules 
provided  the best insurance policy against the arbitrariness and unpredictability of  a power -based 
system tha t failed  to comport with the principle of fairness.  
6.108.   Accordingly, Antigua and Barbuda emphasis ed that d iscussions on reform of the dispute 
settlement system should be aimed at buttressing the rules -based nature of the system.  
6.109.   Indeed, the system should,  out of necessity , preserve at its c ore the  following essential 
characterist ics: (1) its compulsory nature; (2)  the automaticity of its rules and procedures;  (3) the 
impartiality and independence of WTO panels and the Appellate Body; and (4) the enforceabi lity and 
binding nature of decisions rendered.  
6.110.   With those core principles in mind, Antigua and Barbuda  joined others in calling for immediate 
action to reactivate procedures for appointing Appellate Body members.  
6.111.   A failure to do so would risk reverting to  a weaker s ystem that lacked  some of the most 
essential characteristics of the exist ing dispute settlement system. G iven the experience of Antigua 
and Barbuda, any creep towards a power -based system or a system where a Member had 
disproportionate control w ould severely undermine the dispute settlement system's value.   
6.112.   Antigua and Barbuda also noted  that, in the context of ongoing negotiations for improve ments 
to and clarifications of  the Dispute Settlement Understa nding, developing countries had  put forward  a 
number of proposals to increase the meaningful participation of developing countries through special 
and differential treatment.   
6.113.   Those proposals cover ed issues such as enhancing third party rights; securing greater 
participation through the establishm ent of a dispute settlement fund; and improving t he remedies 
provided in the DSU  which would enable small , vulnerable economies to more ef fectively enforce WTO 
rulings. It wa s important that progress would also be made on tho se issues within the context of  
overall reform of the DSU.  
6.114.   Antigua and Barbuda looked  forward to constructive engagement on the most recent proposals 
and to a n urgent, positive and  equitable resolution to the immediate crisis.  
6.115.   The representative of  the Russian Federation  welcomed the  collective efforts to overcome the 
impasse on the Appellate Body app ointment that the Membership had been dragged into. The Russian 
Federation, in particular, commended  the well -balanced statements and  communications presented 
by the European Union, Australia, China, India and other co -sponsors.  
6.116.   The Russian Federation  confirm ed its  openness for the concerted  efforts of Members aimed at 
improving and strengthening the multilateral trading system including the dispute settlement 
mechanism as its crown jewel. The papers  discuss ed constitute d a good basis for further work that 
would  contribute to advancing legal predictability to attain the objectives of the WTO Agreements.  
6.117.   At the same time, the Russian Federation reiterated that no legal ground for blocking  the AB 
Selection Process existed. It therefore  request ed for the process to be launched irrespective of any 
specific concerns or any Member's  view on the outcome of the discussion on how to improve the 
dispute settlement procedu res. 
6.118.   The representative of Thailand  reiterate d its serious systemic concern regarding the ongoing 
impasse on  initiating the Selection Processes to resolve the vacancies in the Appellate Body. With the 
number of Appellate Body members down to only three out  of seven, the di spute settlement system, 
the WTO  pillar which enforced trade rules and ensured  the effective functioning of the rules -based WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 28 - 
 
  multilateral trading system , was currently facing the  risk of paralysi s. Thailand therefore emphasised 
the urgent need to resolve the current Appellate Body impasse.  
6.119.   Thailand  recognise d the concerns that had  been raised by the United States regar ding the 
functioning of the dispute settlement system. Thailand  appreciate d and welcome d the efforts made by  
several Members  in coming up with concrete proposals, including the paper on overreach , to address 
the concerns raised with the view to resolving  the dea dlock in the Appointment of AB  members.  
6.120.   Thailand would  continue to cooperate with all Members as they  pushed for a br eakthrough in 
the current crisis . Thailand indicate d its willingness to c onstructively participate in the approaches and 
in a format  that could  help drive the discussions forward and u ltimately lead to a solution to break the 
impasse on the  appointment of new AB  members as soon as possible.  
6.121.   The representative of Argentina , on behalf of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico,  
Paraguay and Uruguay , said7 that Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia, Mexico, Paraguay, and Uruguay, 
in their capacity as members of the World Trade Organization, before the discussions related to 
processes to reform the o rganization, and aware  of the importance that it played  for the pres ervation 
of economic relation s, global governance and peace, provided the following declaration.  
6.122.   They reaffirm ed the importance of preserving the rules -based multilateral trading system, with 
the WTO at i ts cent re. 
6.123.   They recognis ed the need to work, in a co nstructive a nd inclusive manner, to modernis e and 
improve the functioning of the WTO in its three pillars, so as to allow its Members to face both current 
and future challenges, at all times respecting the fundam ental principles upon which the organization  
had been  founded.  
6.124.   In that regard, they took note of the proposals to modernis e and reform the functioning of the 
WTO, in particular with respect to its dispute se ttlement mechanism, which had  been presented up to 
this date by some Members. They emphasis ed their willingness to discuss tho se and any other proposal 
that could  be presented in the future, always in a constructive manner and with an effort to put forth 
concret e contributions to the  discussion.  
6.125.   They should  do so with the same commitmen t expressed  in May 2017 when they had been 
among  the first to come out in defence of the system  by proposing to initiate the launch of the selection 
processes for members of the Appellat e Body – an effort that had, as of that day, garnered the support 
of 71 M embers.  
6.126.   They stress ed the importance that any reform proposal should ensure that the full operational 
capacity of  the Appellate Body be restored  as an essential element for the preservation of the system.  
6.127.   Likewise, they emphasis ed the importance of preserving the essen tial characteristics of the 
dispute settlement system in any reform process that should start.  
6.128.   They reiterate d the central and signif icant contribution that the dispute settleme nt system 
provided  in promoting rules -based, open, transparent, inclusive,  non-discriminatory and equitable 
trade.  
6.129.   The representative of Argentina  noted  the central role of the WTO as a fund amental institution 
that ensured  transparency, predictability and stability in mu ltilateral trade relations. It wa s therefore 
essential that  its dispute settlement system function ed efficiently and effectively. The system wa s 
currently  undergoing an unprecedented crisis and there wa s an urgent need fo r the General Council 
to adopt decisions.  
6.130.   Argentina wa s aware t hat willingness and commitment were required of all parties in order to 
improve the functioning of the o rganization. The declaration from the recent G20 Lea ders' Summit in 
Buenos Aires had been  a first step in that direction. The leaders had clearly expressed their support 
for the neces sary reform to improve the functioning of the WT O. Some of the limitations the 
                                                
7 The Declaration o f Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia , Mexico, Paraguay and Uruguay on the occasion of 
the Reform of the WTO was subsequently circulated in document RD/GC/10.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 29 - 
 
  organizat ion had in dealing with current  problems aro se from collective responsibilities that they 
should  accept with humility and tackle with determination.  
6.131.   As it had been esta blished when the WTO had been created, t he disp ute settlement system 
had been , without doubt, one of the most distinctive elements characterising the o rganization during 
its first 20 yea rs of existence  as it had provided for a system of conflict resolution  with review of 
decisions by an Appellate Body and concrete mechanisms for suspension of concessions. Agreements 
reached as a result of negotiations had  value to the extent that they could  be validated through a 
dispute settlement system that was reliable,  respected due process and was  relatively fast.  
6.132.   At present, some Members we re of the opinion that the functioning of th e dispute settlement 
system should be improved. At the current  General Council meeti ng, various proposals had  been put 
forward in that re gard. Some of them address ed procedural aspects that could be resolved very easily, 
such as transitional mechanisms for Appellate Body members ending their terms, while t he issues 
underlying others would  require more complex substantive discussions.  
6.133.   Argent ina was a frequent user of the system, having been a party to more than 40 disputes – 
making it one of the Latin American countries with the most experience in defending its trade interests 
at the WTO – and was also an active Member in the already very len gthy negotiations on amendments 
and clarif ications to the DSU. As such, Argentina  would li ke to make timely mention of its  intention to 
participate constructively in discussions aimed at improving those aspects of the system that cause d 
the greatest concer n, as they saw  it as a collective duty to maintain the flexibility needed to achieve 
positive outcomes. Argentina remained  ready to en gage in all discussions that could  be necessary to 
maintain the high standards of effici ency and objectivity of the disput e settlement mechanism.  
6.134.   The dispute settlement system should continue to provide all Members, both developed and 
developing country ones, a means of finding quick solutions to their trade conflicts.  
6.135.   In that regard, Argentina  noted with increasing concern the lack of progress in ini tiating the 
selection process  for new Appellate Body members. It knew the impact that  could have on the 
multilatera l trading system if the issue was  not addressed with the utmost urgency, with a growing 
risk of its operations coming to a complete standstill.  
6.136.   Argentina therefore considered  the initiation of a frank and pragmatic dialogue essential. Such 
a dialogue should include  all stakeholders and should focus  on specific concerns expressed by certain 
Members about the functioning of  the system so that measures could  be taken as soon as possible.  
6.137.   Priorities and working methodologies reflecting the urgency of the situation should also be 
promptly agreed.  
6.138.   Argenti na would  continue contributing to help discussions on WTO reform, in particular the 
dispute settlement pillar, respond to the current challenge s in international trade. As the  world was in 
constant transformation, Members should  be focused on the d iscussio ns and set goals for themselves 
that could  be achieved in the shortest time possible.  
6.139.   The representative of Vanuatu , on behalf of the ACP , echoed the ACP 's statements concerning 
WTO reform at previous meetings. Regarding the submissions under the current a genda item and the 
submission from Singapore and Australia calling for targeted discu ssions on dispute settlement to be 
taken up under the following agenda item, the ACP was still examining those submissions within the 
group.  
6.140.   The ACP appreciate d the statem ents from the Director -General  and Canada at the previous 
Informal TNC and Informal HODs meetings that all Members should  be taken into account regarding 
WTO reform including t he dispute settlement system. The ACP Group also thanked  the proponents for 
indicating  that an inclusive process was  envision ed to take their ideas forward.  
6.141.   For the sake of the system Members  claimed to hold dear, the ACP Group  again urgently 
request ed that the procedure to fill  the vacant seats  in the Appellate Body  be launched.  
6.142.   The representative of Ukraine  supported the joint statement by several Members and 
emphasised  the importance of constructive dialogue  and cooperation with the aim of  finding a mutually WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 30 - 
 
  acceptable solution to deal with the current crisis in volving  the function ing of the dispute settlement 
mechanism.  
6.143.   Ukraine acknowledged the urgency of WTO reform  as a whole, and the need to improve the 
current dispute settlement mechanism so as  to overcome the deadlock and to fill the vacancies in the 
Appellate B ody. Ukraine therefore appreciated  the proposals put forward by the European Union  and 
the co -sponsors on  the respective issue and assured  its willingness to work jointly thereon.  
6.144.   In order to find an appropriate solution in an expeditious manner and to allow for the n ew 
appointments to take place, Ukraine  share d the proposals contained in the listed documents 
concerning the adoption by the General Council of amendments to certain provisions of the 
Understanding on Rules and Procedures Governing the Settlements of  Dispu tes, pursuant to 
Articles  IV:2 and X:8 of the Marrakesh Agreement Establishing the WTO.  
6.145.   The representative of Brazil  said that his delegation co-sponsored  the joint declaration by a 
group of Latin  American Members read by Argentina.  
6.146.   Brazil thanked  the European Union  and its co -sponsors for the proposals on the reform of the 
Dispute Settlement U nderstanding. The proposals sought  to address concerns raised by some 
Members during the process to fill the vacancie s of the Appellate Body. They did so in a balance d 
manner  while also striving to maintain the system' s independence.  
6.147.   Before sharing  specif ic comments about the proposals, Brazil first share d some views about 
process. Brazil had participated in s everal consultations with the European Union  and the other co-
sponsors abou t the proposal and had been  seriously considering co -sponso rship. Although Brazil 
believed that the current rules had served it and the Membership well, it was  open to improvements, 
provided that (1 ) the es sential features of the system wer e preserved and (2) that those modifications 
would set them  on a resolute course to the resumption of the selection p rocesses for vacancies in the 
Appellate Body .  
6.148.   While most of the  elements in the two proposals we re reasonably in line with the first objec tive, 
the pathway to the AB normalizat ion was not yet clear to Brazil – neither in the proposal  nor in the 
positions held by the Member blocking the appointment procedures. For the proponents, the automatic 
launching  of a selection process, which was a poi nt that Brazil supported , would be a result o f the 
proposal's adoption. For Brazil, it wa s already a requ irement of the current rules. Brazil was 
encouraged to have heard  in the co -sponsors ' joint s tatement under sub -item (a), a call first  for the 
unblocking of the selection process. Given the urgency of t he Appellate Body crisis, process was a 
fundamental issue .  
6.149.   Assuming for a moment that the crucial issue of process had been addressed, Brazil share d 
some substant ive comments on the propo sal. Brazil understoo d that both proposals should be 
discussed in conjun ction. That  would be the best way to ensure that any reform process promoted  
improvements in the system while respecting the essential features agreed by Members  in the Uruguay 
Round.  
6.150.   Regard ing the pro posals in sub-item (c), the amendments would contribute to the o bjective 
of strengthening the Appellate Body  and streamlining the sel ection procedures. Brazil  could  therefore 
differ on details  but, in essenc e, such would be agreeable.  
6.151.   Concerning the proposals in sub-item (b ), Brazil could be supportive of the approach regarding 
transitional rules to outgoing Appellate Body  members and of the propose d annual meetings between 
the Appellate Body  and the WTO Members, where their views could be  expressed openly, but without 
questioning the vali dity of particular reports. That  proposal would establish a more direct chan nel of 
communication of Members'  concerns while mainta ining the independence of the Appellate Body. A 
similar approach had  succes sfully been followed a few years ago  upon Brazil's suggestion when 
controversy had ari sen over procedures for the reappointment of a member of the A ppellate Body. 
6.152.   Nevertheless, Brazil had  doubts to the sug gested changes regarding the 90 -day timeframe of 
Article 17.5. In its  view, the proposed approach involved  an extra layer of complexity, notably the 
mechanism whereby adaptations would be introduced to procedures or working arrange ments for 
particular appeals. It  wonder ed whether such consultations with th e Parties would not pose the risk of WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 31 - 
 
  straining the relationship be tween the Parties and the AB m embers and even imply additional delays 
to an already very tight timeframe  given the length and  complexity of cases. T he 90 -day deadline 
would be bet ter enforce d by providing the Appellate Body and the S ecretariat structure with the proper 
means and by adopting other solu tions contained in the proposal  such as the proposed amendment 
to paragraph 8 of Article 17.  
6.153.   About the issues of municipal law and findings unne cessary to resolving a dispute, while the 
proposals seem ed balanced, Brazil did  not share the conc ern that the underlying issues we re not 
properly addressed by th e DSU and the adjudicatory body's practice as they stood. To illustrate, only 
two of the last thirteen appeals reviewed by the Appellate Body had  dealt wi th issues of fact, and, in 
its view, it saw no evidence that the Appellate Body had  strayed from the limits of the DSU.  
6.154.   Likewise, the issue of findings unnecessary for t he resolution of the dispute had  been 
exaggerated, although the language put forward by the proponents seemed harmless in that  case. 
6.155.   Brazil had  probably l eft some issues unattended. Its intervention had already taken a lot of 
the Council's time and it reserve d its right to rev isit tho se and other issues raised by the proposals in 
future opportu nities. Brazil was  ready to engage.  
6.156.   Filling the vacancies should be the Members' first objective. They should fulfil their  shared 
responsibility to resolve the blocking of the selection p rocess and the appointment of Appellate Body 
members. It was  an obligation upon all Members to maintain a standing  and functioning Appellate 
Body as provided by the  DSU. If the current situation wa s already  considered very critical, Brazil noted 
that in December 2019, the term of two of the three remai ning Appellate Body members would expire. 
In that scenario, no divisions would  be ab le to be formed, no appeals would  be heard and , if appealed, 
panel reports could not be adopted. The whole dispute settlement  system would be paralys ed.  
6.157.   In thinking  about amendments to the DSU, Members should not forget that they would  not be 
able to reform something they had allowed to perish.  
6.158.   The representative of Cambodia  intervened on sub -items (b) and (c). Cambodia  wished to 
share some of its concern s on the challenge s encountered by Members in relation to the  dispute 
settlemen t system. Cambodia always counted on a smooth, trustworthy  and well -functioning di spute 
settlement system and had  observed that the system had  encoun tered a critical moment when it had 
become a s erious concern in the organization. In that regard, Cambodia thanked  Members for their 
initiative in submitting proposals related to the Appellate Body selection process and amendment s to 
the DSU contained in W T/GC/W/752/Rev. 2 and WT/GC/W/754. Cambodia was  committed to work 
closely with the sponsors of those proposal s.  
6.159.   The representative of  the United States  thank ed the propo nents for their statements. Tho se 
proposals to some extent acknowledge d the concern the Unit ed States had  been raising in the WTO 
for years – namely, that the Appellate Body had  strayed fro m the role agreed for it by Members.  
6.160.   As the United States had  noted in detailed statements in the Dispute Settlement B ody over 
the past ye ar, many  Members share d those concerns, whether on the mandatory 90 -day deadline for 
appeals, or review of panel findings on domestic law, or issuing advisory opinions on issues not 
necessary to resolve a dispute.  
6.161.   On a close reading, the proposals would not however  effectively addres s the concerns that 
Members had  raised.  
6.162.   Rather than returning the dispu te settlement system to what had been  agreed to by Members 
in the Dispute Settlement Understanding, the proposals instead appear ed to endorse changing the 
rules to accommodate and a uthorise the very approaches that had given rise to Members'  concerns.  
6.163.   The United States had made its views on tho se issue s very clear: if WTO Members said that 
they support ed a rules -based trading system, then the WTO Appellate B ody should follow the rules 
they had agreed to in 1995.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 32 - 
 
  6.164.   And so, the Appellate Body should  circulate its reports within 90 day s of an appeal. A person 
who had  ceased to  be an Appellate Body member could  not continue deciding appeals as if his term 
had been  extended by the Dispute Settlement Body.  
6.165.   The Appellate Body could  not make findings on issues of fact, including but not limited to those 
relating to domestic law.  
6.166.   The Appellate Body could  not give advis ory opinions on issues that would  not assist the DSB  
in making a recommendation to bring a WTO -inconsistent measure into compliance with WTO rules.  
6.167.   The Appellate Body could  not assert that its reports serve d as precedent or provide 
authoritative interpretations.  
6.168.   And the Appellate Body could not change Membe rs' substantive rights or obligations as set 
out in the text of the WTO agreements.  
6.169.   Rather than seeking to make revisions to the text of the Dispute Settlement  Understanding to 
permit what was currently  prohibited, the United States believed it was  necessa ry for Members to 
engage in a deeper discussion of the concerns raised, to con sider why the Appellate Body had  felt free 
to depart from what Members had agreed to, and to discuss how best t o ensure that the system 
adhered  to WTO rules as written.  
6.170.   With resp ect to the proposal advanced by the European Union, China, a nd India, it wa s hard 
to see how it in any way responded  to the concerns raised by  the United States, as some had alleged. 
The United States had  repeatedly highli ghted how the Appellate Body had  disregarded WTO rules a nd 
that greater accountability wa s therefore required.  
6.171.   However, the trilateral EU -China -India proposal would make the Appellate Body even  less 
accountable, and more susceptible to overreaching, by extending the terms of  Appellate Body  
members, removing the opportunity of Members to decide on any  possible reappointment, making 
Appellate Body membership a full -time position, and  increasing resources for the Appellate Body 
Secretariat.  
6.172.   As the United States had  stated many times in the Di spute Settlement Body, and as it  had 
demonstrated to numerous delegations ov er the past year, it was  ready to engage with  other Members 
on the important issues raised.  
6.173.   The representative of Hong Kong, China  said that t he rule s-based mult ilateral trading sy stem 
required  a properly functioning dispute settlement mechanism to safeguard the rights and obligations 
of its Members. Members could not afford to let that  mechanism lose its effectiveness, let  alone grind 
to a complete halt – but they were  risking exac tly that.  
6.174.   Hong Kong, China appreciated  the efforts made by the proponents to address the 
unprecedented challenges facing  the dispute settlement system and did  not believe that the 
discussions on improving the DSU should be a reason to delay the process fo r filling Appellate Body 
vacancies  – which should be launched immediately.  
6.175.   The United States had however said repeatedly at DSB meetings that it was not in a position 
to support a decision to start the process  because t he systemic concerns that it had  identified remain ed 
unaddressed. The United States had  also said repeatedly that it would co ntinue its efforts and its 
discussions with Members and with th e DSB Chair to seek a solution.  
6.176.   Now that other Members had  taken the initiative to p ropose substantive so lutions, Hong Kong, 
China  hoped that those proposals could  be the basis  for constructive engagement.  
6.177.   Hong Kong, China  noted the United States' detailed response that day. If concerns remain ed 
unaddressed, ways on how they could address them should be spelt  out. If the proposals on the table 
were considered not good enough, then counter -proposals should be put forward  indicating  how the 
gaps could  be bridged.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 33 - 
 
  6.178.   Hong Kong, China looked  forward to the discussion on the  matter as it progressed  to a new 
and productive phase.  
6.179.   On a personal note, as it was her  last General Council meeting, she took the opportunity to 
thank all her colleagues for their kind words and well wishes and more importantly for their friendship, 
suppor t and wise counsel through out her  years in Geneva.  
6.180.   In January, she would have been in Geneva  for 6 years. Looking back, she  should be 
immensely grateful  for th e trust that Members had in her  that had given her  the preci ous opportunities 
to learn from and contribute to  the work of t he CTE, TPRB and TRIPS Council. In s erving  in tho se 
bodies in her personal capacity, she  cherish ed the constructive engagem ent of all the colleagues that 
she had  worked with: ambassadors who had been  willing to listen and compromise; delegates whose 
knowle dge and experience had shone through every conversation. She was encouraged that  having 
gone through animated debates, Members had  managed to resolve differences and celebrate a few 
outcomes.  
6.181.   She also thanked the Secretariat  for the ir unfailing support and  helpful advice.  As they had  
ploughed through the routines and had managed the surprises, she had  only come to admire more 
and more their  resourcefulness and professionalism.  
6.182.   In her official capacity, she had seen through two TPRs for Hong Kong , China  and had 
represented her delegation  at many discussions, consultations, negotiations and sometimes Ministerial 
meetings, experiencing all the moments of joy, excitement, agitation, frustr ation and disappointment 
that they  had all shared.  
6.183.   She had come in 2013 a nd had witness ed the success of the Bali Package. Time had gone by 
and Members had delivered further results – but many challenges had also arisen. Her only regret 
was that she would  be leaving the WTO before seeing the efforts of reforming it bore  fruit. She had 
recently  been at the WTO Bookshop where she had seen a special diary for the new year. It had been 
a 5-year diary which meant that when one was done after a year, one would  return to the same first 
page and the n start writing all over again. In the  end, one could  turn to any page, and one would see 
what had been  written on that same date in each of the five years. She thought that it was an 
interesting way to track one' s evolution.  
6.184.   The WTO also kept a multiple -year diary.  At every Ministerial Confer ence, Members wrote 
down what they thought and what they did.  On the same day, 12 December, twenty -two years ago, 
their Ministers had been  drafting what would eventually become the WTO's first M inisterial Declaration.  
It stated, "[i] n pursuit of the goal of sustainable growth and development for the common good, we 
envisage a world where trade flows freely. To this end we renew our commitment to: a fair, equitable 
and more open rule -based system; progressive liberalization and elimination of tariff and non -tariff 
barriers to trade in goods; progressive liberalization of trade in services; rejection of all forms of 
protectionism; elimination of discriminatory treatment in international trade relations; integration of 
developing and least -developed countries and economies in transition into the multilateral system; 
and the maximum possible level of transparency."  
6.185.   Such Declaration provided bold vision  and st rong commitments. In the succeeding years, 
Members had heard some of those notions reaffirmed. O thers had somehow got ten lost along the way. 
And the time had come when Members could not even agree to say that they supported the mu ltilateral 
trading system, and when imposing hefty tariffs became  the new norm . She wondered whether it was 
due to the change in ci rcumstances or if it was because Members had changed.   
6.186.   For her , the first Ministerial Declaration remained every bit valid. One could say that people in 
Hong Kong, China all had free trade in their DNA. Theirs was  a story o f how a tiny fishing village could 
turn itself into what they were at present – relying on free trade as their engine for growth. And it wa s 
the rule s-based mult ilateral trading system that had  created a predictable and transp arent trading 
environment for thei r businesses, allowing th em to compete glo bally on a level playing field. Hong 
Kong, China wa s a beneficiary of t he multilateral trading system – as so were all other WTO Members.  
6.187.   As they had built the system together, they could also  upgrade it  together. Although she would 
no lon ger be a part of that endeavour, her team and her successor would carry on making Hong Kong, 
China's contributions.   WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 34 - 
 
  6.188.   She hoped  that one day, Members would  see that, despite the  biggest challenges, the 
organization that they  cared about would  re-emerge stro nger and better, and the rule s-based 
multilateral trading system that they had created for the common good would stand the test of time. 
Then, they co uld all look back at that  multiple -year WTO diary w ith a smile, knowing that it had been 
their collective perseverance, commitment and determination that had made that  happen.  
6.189.   The representative of Tanzania  intervened on sub -items (a), (b) and (c) in general terms and 
thank ed all M embers who  had issued or  were part of  the joint  statement and the communications 
currently being taken up.   
6.190.   Tanzania stressed the importance of urgently addressing the issues faced in relation to the 
dispute settlement mechanism to avoid reaching the point where it would be rendered completely 
inactive  and dy sfunctional. Like many other delegations,  Tanzania wa s a believer of the mu ltilateral 
trading system with a clear enf orcement mechanism. T he DSB wa s there to serv e the broader interests 
of all M embers irresp ective of any shortcoming it could have. T anzania therefore  welcome d proposals 
aiming at improving the system.  
6.191.   The improvements being proposed on the D SU should be made in parallel with a continuously 
functioning DSB. Since it would take time to amend  existing WTO agreements such as the DSU, 
Memb ers should not risk impeding the  proper functioning  of the DSB during the  period of intense 
negotiations.  
6.192.   While Tanzania  support ed the initiatives and efforts of Members aimed at improving the 
dispute s ettlement mechanism, it  echoed the call made by the A CP Group and some other Members 
to urgent ly launch the Selection Process for Appellate Body members. For its part, Tanzania pledged 
its commitment  to actively engage with other Members on the  matter.  
6.193.   The representative of Japan  thanked the co -sponsors for their effort s. Many of the proposals 
presen ted in the current agenda item  in document WT/GC/W/752/Rev.2 warrant ed good, solution -
focused dis cussions by all responsible Members who sought to see improvement in the dispute 
settlement system including the  Appellate Body. Japan considered  the proposal  as a good starting 
point of the  discussions.  
6.194.   In a number of ways, the dispute settlement system was currently  in crisis. The situation had  
moreover been aggravated by the differences in the perspective of and the diagnosis by Members 
consequently resulting in differences in their respective prescriptions on how to address the current 
issues faced. One thing however remained certain  – responsible  Members should immediately act to 
squarely face the challenges as inac tion wa s no longer an option.  
6.195.   In that regard, Japan welcomed  the solution -oriented init iative by the co -sponsors of those 
proposals. The proposals in document WT/GC /W/752/Rev.2 provided  specific ways to address the 
specific concerns on the functioning o f the dispute settlement system which had been raised for years 
but had  been left unaddressed.  
6.196.   The proposals appear ed to seek a solution through the clarifications of the text of the DSU. 
For example, on the so -called Rule  15 issue, it proposed  to create a transitional rule in the text of the 
DSU with certain objective cr iteria. In that way, it attempted  to address the concerns about the 
authority of the Appellate Body to adopt a transitional rule by making it  clear that such authority 
rested wi th Members.  
6.197.   Another example involved  the so-called 90-day issue. Japan understood that the  co-sponsors 
essentially propose d to codify past practice in which the Appellate Body had sought consent of the 
Parties to a dispute upon foreseeing that it would be unable to complete its proceeding within 90 days. 
The proposal also suggest ed interesting ideas concerning  ways in which the Appellate Body could 
ensure its observance of the 90-day time -period.  
6.198.   Japan considered the proposals as valuable contribution s to Members'  solution -focused 
dialogues and would provi de a good start and basis for their future work.  
6.199.   Japan noted  that in footnote 1 of the document, the co -sponsors indicate d the pos sibility to 
"consider appropriate legal instruments other than amending th e DSU ". Japan agreed that such WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 35 - 
 
  flexibility was important to their  common end eavour to seek solutions which were acceptable to all 
Members.  
6.200.   On the issue of process, Japan was flexible and would proactively engage in the Members'  
common efforts to restore an d improve th e proper functioning of the dispute settlement system and 
looked  forward to wor king with any interested Member to that  end. 
6.201.   The representative of Afghanistan  was of the view that a well -functi oning dispute settlement 
body was an imperative to t he multilateral trading system  and the WTO to e nsure a full and fair 
enforceme nt of rules and obligations by Members.  
6.202.   Afghanistan reiterated the importance of the dispute settlement system  in promoting rules -
based, open, transparent, inclusive, non -discrim inatory and equi table international trade.  Afghanistan 
therefore welcomed and supported any initiative and effort  to address the impasse on the selection of 
Appellate B ody members as well as the discussion to amend the rules and procedures governing  the 
DSB in a manner that was acceptable to all M embers.  
6.203.   Afghanistan  encourage d all M embers  to positively contribute in tho se discussions and in the 
efforts to take that  matter forward without delay and in any format which  could be  suggest ed. 
6.204.   The representative of Pakistan  said that a n independent and effectiv ely functioning Appellate 
Body wa s crucial for the dispute settlement system and the long -term sustainability of the multilateral 
trading system  in general. Pakistan reiterate d its longsta nding support for the agenda of  immediate ly 
appointing Appellate  Body members. In that regard, Pakistan  welcome d the proposals in documents 
WT/GC/W/752/Rev.2 and WT/GC/W/753/Rev.1 with the view to resolving the current impasse on the 
issue and  consider ed that those proposals had provided Members  sound base for further discussions.  
6.205.   Any amendment  to the DSU , while aimed at enhancing efficiency of the Appellate Body , should  
not affect its essential characteristics. Furthermore, any solution should not jeopardi se the 
independence and integrity of the Appellate Body and in no way dilute the rights and privileges of 
developing countries.  
6.206.   Pakistan  thank ed the proponents for their efforts and look ed forward to working with them to 
help resolve the current crisis in  the Appellate Body in the best possible manner.  
6.207.   The representative of Chad, on behalf of the LDCs , said that the LDCs took  note of the 
stateme nts of the delegations that had taken the floor under that item. The LDCs would  be looking 
closely at th e various  proposals made and would like the discussions to resolve the issue r elated to 
the Appellate Body. They would also like the  process to be inclusive and to involve all Members in a 
transparent manne r.  
6.208.   The WTO undeniably required  its two pillars – dispute s ettlement and negotiation s. The LDCs, 
more than other Members, given their  specific di fficulties and vulnerabilities, we re convinced  that the 
correct running of those two pillars of the WTO would  enable them to be b etter included in global 
trade. And it wa s only through frank, realistic, pragmatic and flexible discussions that Members could 
re-establish trust and guarantee that the WTO ensured that the rules were abided by all allowing the 
Appellate Body to play its role f ully and reduce trade tensions. The LDC Group  wished the Chairman, 
the Secretariat and all Members an excellent end to the year and hope d that discussions in 2019 would 
be positive and fruitful . 
6.209.   The representative of Ecuador  intervened on sub -items (b) and (c). Ecuador  welcome d the 
proposals made by several Members in documents WT/GC/W/752 and WT/GC/W/ 753 that deal t with 
a very urgent and important i tem relating to global trade. Ecuador  noted that there we re proposals 
on reforms to the organization including on special and different ial treatment  which would require 
developing countries  minimal conditions to compete in an advanced area and without taking into 
account the situation created by  the circumstances surrounding  the Appellate Body. That was why 
Ecuador  welcome d the proposals currently tabled  as they deal t with concerns expressed by one 
Member and suggest ed amendme nts to the DSU. Those proposals would put the Appellate Body to  a 
better  situation  by allowing the appointment of its members without changing its nature and while 
maintaining its independence . WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 36 - 
 
  6.210.   The dispute  settlement mechanism was  a vital component of the system. It was also 
paradoxical that while Members  reiterate d the advantages of a multilatera l trading system and what 
it had already provided them, they  simultaneous ly challenge d the way the WTO was run. It wa s 
therefore logical that the benefits could only stem from a dispute se ttlement system which Ecuador 
and other Members had been able to use in the  past. Ecuador therefore supported the proposals 
presented that da y given that they would allow Members  to overcome the current situation and to 
enable them to reap the benefits of the rules -based  multilateral trading system as ensured by the  
dispute settlement mechanism.  
6.211.   The representative of South Africa  intervened on sub -items (a), (b) and (c) in general terms 
and thanked the co -sponsors for their proposals. The dispute settlement mechanism was in crisis 
unless Members would co me to terms with the growing threat to the dispute settlement mechanism – 
not o nly existing rules but also any discussion of new rules in the WTO or on reform would be 
redundant. South Africa viewed the proposals as a positive step forward as long as they engender ed 
direct engagement from all Members.  
6.212.   Whereas the proposals address ed the most immed iate issues that the co -sponsors saw  as 
necessary to unlock the current Appellate Body impasse, the separate proposals deal t with issues that 
could  require different timeframe s for possible solution. In that respect, Members  needed an inclus ive 
discuss ion on all proposals which meant that the  communications in WT/GC/W/752 and WT/GC/W/ 753 
as well as any o ther proposals or ideas that could  be tabled should be taken forward in a dedicated 
discussion as had been suggested by the European Union  in its general statement on be half of co -
sponsors under sub -item (a). That ensured that all concerns we re covered which include d those raised 
by one Member as well as the systemic concerns that would n eed to be addressed and that had  an 
impact on all other M embers.  
6.213.   Furthermore, no time -frame had been specified within which tho se discussions should be 
completed. It would be important to have a time delimitation given the fact that the tenure of two 
further Appellate Body members would  run out by the end of 20 19.  
6.214.   South Africa also took note of the interven tion of the United States  including its call for a 
deeper discussion on issues raised by some of the proposals tabled by the co-sponsors. South Africa 
reiterated  its belief that any deep discussion would hav e to ensure that all proposals would be  taken  
forward in an equal and even -handed manner.  
6.215.   The representative of Guatemala  said that his delegation  had looked at  the proposals  with 
interest. A s a frequent user of the dispute settlement system , Guatemala welc omed the proposals that 
endeavour ed to overcome th e current crisis. T he dispu te settlement system wa s one of the best in the 
world and it  had worked well in enabling Members t o overcome their differences. The dispu te 
settlement system had  furthermo re shown that it could provide predictability and stability to the 
multilateral trading system.  
6.216.   Nevertheless, the WTO dispute settlement system was not perfect and could be improved. In 
that regard, appropriate mechanisms were available  to allow any  Membe r to make suggestions for an 
amendment . The interested Members would normally submit their concerns and discuss them with 
other Members and put them forward as a proposal to overcome the issue at hand.  In that  case, t he 
current  proposals show ed the interes t of Members to work constructively to protect and preserve the 
dispute settlement system and the multilateral trading system.  
6.217.   Time was however passing by very quickly. Two years had already  gone by since the  crisis 
had begu n. In exactly one year, th e disp ute settlement system would  no longer have an App ellate 
Body and the Members would have gone back 50 years to same situation as in the GATT days. Not 
havin g a dispute settlement system was  not quite the same thing as having one that entailed  concerns 
that could be overcome within the context of the WTO Agreement. Guatemala believed Members had 
an interest  to deal with the concerns expressed by the United States.  
6.218.   All Members wanted  to pa rticipate constructively in the reform process since the dispute 
settlem ent system concerned them all – making it their joint responsibility. Many of the concerns  
raised could be easily overcome while others would  require a more  in-depth discussion. No solution 
would however  be found unless all Members took  part in the process  in a p ro-active manner. In that WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 37 - 
 
  regard, Guatemala  suggest ed that a n open -ended, informal proce ss be set up to facilitate the 
discussions cover ing the dispute s ettlement system that was binding to all Members . 
6.219.   A binding dispute settlement s ystem wa s vital for the multilateral trading system to work. 
Otherwise, it would be useless to talk about WTO reform , new disciplines and ne w multilateral 
commitments if they did  not have a mechan ism to ensure that obligations we re abided by.  
6.220.   The representative of Indonesia  intervened on sub -items (a), (b) and (c) as well as on the 
following agenda item . Indonesia thank ed the respective Members for their submissions in an effort 
to find an agreed solution to the impasse in the appointment of Appellate Body members. Members' 
topmost priority should  be to break the impasse in filling up those  vacancies . Without the Appellate 
Body, Indonesia failed to see any  meaning ful role for new agreements if they could not be  legally 
enforced.   
6.221.   In that regard, Indonesia welcomed the submission put forward by the European Union and 
the co-sponsor s. Those proposals would serve to extend  discussion s among Members on how they 
could make a breakthrough in the impasse. In  undertaking  such discussions aimed at problem -solving , 
Members shou ld be open -minded and constructively engaged.  
6.222.   Nothing, not even the multilateral trading system, wa s perfect. However, t o leave that  issue 
hanging for a long period of time would not only make Members  irresponsible , but would also  more 
critically undermin e the predictability of the mul tilateral trading system that they  adhere d to. 
Indonesia stood ready to actively participate in any pr oblem -solving discussion on that  important 
issue.   
6.223.   The representative of Peru supported  a multilateral trading system that was based on clear 
rules that generate d predictability for global trade. For Peru, trade was an engine  for economic 
development because it contributed  to generating jobs and  improving the well -being of its people. In 
that regard, Peru  welcome d the statemen ts made that express ed interest in taking part in the 
discussions on proposals related to the reform of the WTO.  
6.224.   Peru welcome d with interest the initiatives and proposals to improve and modernise the WTO 
and in particular to strengthen the dispute settlement system and the Appellate Body , as well as 
updating trade rules through inclusive negotiat ions. Peru  thank ed the propo nents for the submissions 
that were being taken up and  echoed the sentiment of those who had mentioned of organising  
constructiv e discussions . Moving from ideas to action wa s the path  required to reach convergence. In 
that regard,  Peru welcomed the fact that the  proposals  in WT/GC/W/752 and WT/GC/W/753 contain ed 
elements that constitute d good foundation to reach an agree ment.  
6.225.   Peru shared  the main co ncerns of the proponents and welcome d points  1, 2 and 5  of the 
amendment prop osals in WT/GC/W/752.  In relation to point 4 of the  amendment proposal in  the same 
document, further clarificati ons and additional information were required. Fo r example, in point 4 of 
the document, Peru found  the expression "to the extent this is necessary" somewhat unclear. That  
modification seemed  to provide a certain amount of freedom to the Appellate Body to express itself 
on issues that the Body believed  convenient while leav ing aside at its discretion the determination of 
matters that  could have been relevan t to settling a dispute. In that sense, that point required further 
discussion and Peru could not  support that specific amendment.  
6.226.   On the other hand, w ith regard to the proposals for amendment s in WT/GC/W/753, point 2 
was consistent with what had been  stated by Peru during a discussion on ideas and  initiatives with the 
same objective , and Peru could support that amendment.  In the pro posal to amend Paragr aph 1 of 
point 1 of the document, Peru had not found  any further in formation on the details on the appointment 
of the members and  the budgetary implications of that specific amendment. No in formation related to 
the geographical distribution relating to the  appointment of new members  could be identified. Peru  
asked the proponents to provide further information on points  3 and 4 of WT/GC/W/ 753, given that 
the exclusive character related to the proposals under those  points  needed to be analysed in light of 
the current new commitments that would have to be undertaken in view of  their implementation .  
6.227.   In particular, Peru  encourage d the proponents to provide  addition al comments on the follow ing 
questions either during that  session or  at another  appropriate  time.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 38 - 
 
  6.228.   With regard to the amendment in Paragraph 3 of point 3 of WT/GC/W/753, Peru asked  whether 
the amendment which included  exclusiveness for the work of the Appellate Body members would 
require an increase in remuneration or a ch ange to the conditions that had  concerned them until 
present. With regard to Paragraph 8 of  point 4 of WT/GC/W/753, Peru  asked  what conditions would 
change if they provided the Appellate Body members with a  full-time status particularly on whether 
or not their  remuneration level would c hange and on whether  or not the  amendment  would affect or 
change Members'  budgetary contributions .  
6.229.   Peru reiterate d its availability to continue to discuss  those amendments and proposals in a 
constructive manner and  any other  proposal that had the similar objective of strengthening the dispute 
settlement system.  
6.230.   The representative of Turkey  said that his delegation was deeply concerned with the current 
impasse in the Appellate Body. Considering the urgency of the matter, any proposal to address the 
concerns  on the dispute settlement mechanism should b e discussed separately without  linking them  
to the launching of the selection process for the vacant positions.  
6.231.   Turkey noted that it  was the first time that Members had  submitted  text-based proposals to 
the Gen eral Council to address the need for chan ge for  a more effective dispute s ettlement 
mechanism. Turkey found tho se initiatives as steps taken in the right d irection and Members should 
engage in tho se discussions in a constructive manner.  
6.232.   Turkey  continue d to examine all three proposals carefull y. As a preliminary comment, Turkey 
found that tho se proposals constitute d a basis for future discussions. On the other hand, Turkey also 
urged the United States to join the consensus to launch the selection process an d to bring its concrete 
proposals to the table.  He said that Turkey stood  ready to engage cons tructively to help overcome the  
deadlock.  
6.233.   The representative of Uruguay  said that  his delegation  co-sponsored the state ment read out 
by Argentina at the meeting. Uruguay reiterated  its commitment to the  multilateral trading system 
and highlight ed its importance for  developing countries . To that end, t he functioning of the dispute 
settlement mechanism was  crucial for the very survival of the system. 
6.234.   At the meeting, Members had  witnessed the presentation of different proposals aimed at 
improving the organization in a constru ctive and inclusive fashion. Uruguay  welcome d those proposals 
and stressed its readiness  to contribute to the quest for finding solutions that too k into account the 
interests of all Members. It wa s necessary to unblock  the selection process  of the m embers of the 
Appellate Body. In that regard, Uruguay said that in curing the disease, they  should not kill the patient.  
6.235.   The representative of Nigeria  intervened on sub -items  (a), (b) and (c). Nigeria  support ed the 
statement made by Vanuatu on behalf o f the ACP. Nigeria thank ed the co -sponsors for their proposals 
and Members for their construc tive engagement. The proposals we re still being reviewed in capi tal. 
Nigeria nevertheless saw the proposals as a positive development, forward -looking in the context of 
the dispute settlement reform, a nd could serve as basis for  constructive engagement.  
6.236.   The resolution of the present stalemate was  of critical importance for Nigeria,  not only for 
systemic reasons but also for its commercial interest s. Even though Nigeria wa s not an active user of 
the dispute settlement mechanism, settling dispute s in a timely and short -term manner was  
fundamenta l. Filling the Appellate Body vacancies should therefore be an urgent priority of all Members 
given that it was their collective responsibility to resolve it.  
6.237.   The legitimacy of the mechanism was  important to all Members including Nigeria. Members' 
inclination to bring dispute to the WTO was  however premised  on the trust that the system would 
handle them objectively  and would treat all  participant s fairly, regardless of their origin and 
development status. Nigeria looked  forward to an inclusive process and wish ed to further emph asise 
the urgency  for the commencement  of the selection process for  Appellate Body members.  
6.238.   Finally, Nigeria wa s open to discuss constructively all the procedural and substantive concerns 
raised. The process envisaged in the dedicated discussion should remain open, transparent, inclusive 
and responsive to other creative ideas including a proper s olution to resolve the  stalemate.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 39 - 
 
  6.239.   The representative of Chile thanked  the European Union and other co -sponsors for their 
proposals to improve t he dispute settlement system. Those proposals served as basis for Members' 
work to reform the system by addressing the concerns raised and achieving consensus to start the 
Selection  Process for the Appellate Body  members . Chile would be pragmatic and would  participate 
constructively in building consensus on the DSU reforms and in reaching an agreement as soon as 
possible. Chile also associated  itself to the statement made by Argentina on behalf of a G roup of Latin 
America n Countries which  recognise d the nee d to modernise and improve the functioning of the WTO 
highlight ing the important contribution of the dispute set tlement mechanism to promote the rules -
based multilateral trading  system . 
6.240.   The representative of Honduras  thank ed the European Union for their ef forts and all other co -
sponsors for presenting their proposals. In a  constructive and committed spirit, Honduras had 
submitted a proposal at the DSB with a view to try to channel the  discussions which would help 
Members find a solution to that  disagreement . Honduras also expressed its intention  to take part in 
the discussions whatever the format Members would choose . 
6.241.   The representative of  the Dominican Republic  thank ed the delegations who had submitted 
proposals on the  important issue  at hand. Members had  different le gal frameworks. Some were based 
on common law while others on civil law. Such difference had repercussions on the way each Member 
viewed the  current situation in the dispute settlement system. On the other hand, as an autonomous 
system in  the in ternational community , international law had  its own features.  
6.242.   The current procedures of the dispute settlement system reflect ed to a certain extent the 
commitments to overcome weaknesses in the d ispute settlement mechanism. T hey however 
necessitated fine-tuning to improve the system's functioning . The current circumstances highlight ed 
the need to bring changes to the mechanism. It was  therefore appropriate to immediately open the 
broadest debate possible on the matter . That was essential consider ing the complexity of the legal 
and technical issues surrounding the matter – which would require the participation of experts which 
could be done through a parallel debate in a manner agreeable to all Members.  
6.243.   Members should note that the legal instruments th at they had we re part and parcel  of an 
international treaty. Consequently, any decision taken in the current bodies of the dispute settlement 
mechanism should take into account  the criteria of interpretation stipulated in the Vienna Convention 
on Law of Tr eaties to maintain consistency on rulings when settling disputes.  
6.244.   While focus ing on reform ing the organization and its specific p illars such as dispute settlement, 
Members should not forget to also reform the trade policies  that distort ed internat ional tra de – which 
were precisely those that we re most frequently discussed in the DSB. The Dominican Republic hoped 
that a solution would  be found on the current crisis and stressed the importance of urgently reaching 
consensus in that regard . 
6.245.   The representative of China  said that his delegation  had listened carefully to the statement by 
the United States and  had felt disappointed and confused , but not surprised.  China was willing and 
hoped  to continue discussions on relevant issues with all Members including the United States.  
6.246.   China had  several questions regarding the  statement by the United States.  First, regarding 
the issue of 90 days, the existing r ule stipulated the 90 -day deadline for Appellate R eview. However, 
after mo re than twenty years, cases had become more complex paving the way for case materials to 
also surge . In the early years , a small carton already sufficed for all case -related materials such as  in 
"United States – Gasoline (DS2)". That was no longer the case. Nowadays, dozens of cartons  were 
needed to pile relevant mater ials for almost every case. That wa s the reality faced by the  Appellate 
Body and could be a reason why it could  not finish its work on time.  
6.247.   Given the United States'  position to oppose the increase of resources, China asked what e lse 
could Members do. They we re already  struggling to find a way, for example, on what they should look 
for in selecting Appellate Body members in the future. China asked whether they should look for those 
who we re able to read ten lines at a glance or ask the Appellate Body members to work sixteen  hours  
a day, and only sleep for five  hours and eat for three hours each day. He had done that himself thirty -
five years ago during his preparations for his  colleg e entrance examination in China,  but he knew that 
it was not sustainable. Under such circumstances , China wondered what suggestions could the United 
States make in that regard.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 40 - 
 
  6.248.   Second, r egarding the issue of overreach, China wanted  the Appellate Body t o stay in line with 
its mandate  rather than expanding their adjudicative powers. Members did  not however have 
consensus over the c riteria to determine whether an overreach occurred . Apart from  urging the 
Appellate B ody to take serious note of  that issue, China asked the United States what else could 
Members d o.  
6.249.   Third, r egarding the issue of precedent, w hen the Appellate Body had made adjud ications in 
previous disputes, China did not know why those judgments could not be used as references and why 
they should waste time and resources to redo th e analysis of th e already analysed legal issues. Those 
ran counter to the judicial economy principle  and which directly conflicted with the position  of the 
United States to enhance the efficiency of dispute settlement.  
6.250.   Fourth, regarding solvin g concerns of the United Stat es, the United States viewed  that some 
suggestions by the European Union, China and India would  make the Appellate Body even less 
accountable. China asked the United States to respond  to the proposal s and identify which of its 
concerns had been addressed and which were not.  China wondered whether the United States had  
specific suggestions on how to a ddress those remaining concerns and i f not, whether it was its 
intention  to sit back and wait for the  paralysis of the Appellate Body.  
6.251.   China welcomed Ambassado r Shea' s statement that the United Sta tes would like to engage in 
deep discus sions with other Members on that issue. China hoped its questions could be answered in 
the future in-depth discussions.  
6.252.   The representative of  the United States  said that with resp ect to the 90 -day rule, the United 
States had made its points clear in the DSB. He noted that  he was  one of the few Ambassadors at the 
past several DSB  meetings where the United States had laid out its  concerns . He therefore  encourage d 
more Ambassadors to  come to the DSB meetings. The United States  would be la ying at the next DSB 
meeting its  position on the issue of precedent – on how the Appell ate Body inappropriately asserted  
that a ruling should be considered precedent absent cogent reasons  even though t here was  nothing 
in the DSU or any o ther WTO Agreement that suggested  that.  
6.253.   With respect to the 90 -day rule, if Ambassadors had been at the DSB meeting where he had 
delivered the United States' intervention, they  would  have heard the statistics. Although the statistics 
could already be  a little bit outdated as they had been given a couple of months earlier , the United 
States said that s ince 2011, the Appellate Body had started departing from the 90 -day deadline . 
Moreover, t he Appellate Body had  not issued a single appeal within 90 days since mid -2014. The 
United States did not think that it was just because  of the complexity of the cases. Since mid -2014, 
the average length of appeals was  approximately 163 days according to his recollection of what he 
had said at the DSB a couple of months ago and those figures could have already changed.  
6.254.   In any case, that was the problem. The United States  encourage d that kind of interactiv e 
discussion. He had already had them  in private, bilateral and group sessions during the course of the 
year. He had made more formal interventions at the DSB as well a s at the General Council . He 
reiterated that the United States was prepared to engag e in a deep discussion about tho se issues.  
6.255.   The representative of  the European Union  observed that there wa s a very broad support for 
many of the concret e proposals the co -sponsors had  put forward in the two different communications. 
Moreover , and as important, the European Union had  taken good note of th e fact that all Members 
who had sp oken had  expressed their readiness to engage in a discussion on concrete textual proposals. 
He therefore hope d that the  interactive discussion for which  there was clearly an appetite could  
commence soon – as of the st art of next year – so that then they co uld pave the way for the launching 
of the selection process to fill the four vacant posts in the Appellate Body.  
6.256.   The Chairman  said that as had been heard  in the discussion, Members had  different views 
about the functioning of the Appel late Body and various  ideas had been put forward. But there wa s a 
general view among delegations that the matter needed  to be addressed very urgently and that more 
focused d iscussion was necessary. He therefore proposed  that an informal process be set up under 
the auspices of the General Council  to allow focused discussion. He would be available the following  
week to hear delegations' views on the way forward, together with the DSB Chair when she was 
available. He would  send out a communication in that regard very shortly. He w ould then offer concrete WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 41 - 
 
  suggestions about how to organise the informal process so that Members could  start a focused 
discussion based on textual proposals as soon as pos sible. He  trusted that  this was acceptable.  
6.257.   The General Council took note  of the statements made under the three sub -items and of the 
Chairman's remarks.  
7  TARGETED DISCUSSIONS  ON DISPUTE SETTLEME NT ISSUES – COMMUNIC ATION FROM 
AUSTRALIA, SINGAPORE  AND COSTA RICA (WT/ GC/W/754/REV .2) 
7.1.  The Chairman  recalled that the item had been  placed on the agenda at the request of Australia 
and Singapore together with a communication co -sponsored by Costa Rica, Canada and Switzerland  
in document WT/GC/W/754/Rev. 2. He i nvited the delegation of Australia to introduce the 
communication.  
7.2.  The representative of Australia  said that in Australia' s view, a well -functioning WTO requir ed a 
well-functioning disput e settlement system which served  to preserve the rights and ob ligations of 
Members and ensured that rules we re enforceable.   
7.3.  Members we re all aware of concerns, raised over many years, regarding the functioning of the 
dispute settleme nt system  with a particul ar focus on the Appellate Body. The fact those concerns had 
been raised at the DSB was a call for all Members to engage in good fait h to work towards  mutually 
agreeable solutions. Simply put, it was already time for problem -solving.   
7.4.  It was in that spirit that Australia  had co -sponsored WT/GC/W/752 under the previous agenda 
item.   
7.5.  To complement that approach , Australia had  also circu lated a proposal with Singapore, Cos ta 
Rica, Canada and Switzerland in document WT/GC/W/754/Rev.2  to initiate a targeted discussion on 
the remaining issue of concern, specifically, that dispute reports by pa nels and the Appellate Body had  
added to, or dimi nished, rights or obligations under the WTO Agreement.   
7.6.  It wa s clear that such concerns would  not easily be addressed and would  take time, but that 
could not be a r eason to delay commencing work. To the contrary, that was precisely the reason why 
Members should move forward with discussions immediately  as part of the dialogue on ways to 
improve the functioning of the dispute settlement system.  
7.7.  In setting out that proposal, the proponents did not prejudge t he scope of the concerns raised  
or the possible act ion that could  be taken in response.   
7.8.  The proponents' intention was simple and pragmatic. They  wanted the immediate initiation of a 
solution -focused process allowing for targeted discussions on dispute settlement issues, including the 
concerns raised that pa nels and the Appellate Body had  added to, or diminished, rights or obligations 
under the WTO Agreem ent.  
7.9.  Members had  a collective responsibility to resolve the challenges threatening th e dispute 
settlement system and  to ensure t he enforceability of WTO rules. Such discussions could not be 
delayed and should  be an essential part of any future process ini tiated by the Chair man to consider 
dispute settlement reform matters.  
7.10.   Australia  called on all Members to engage constructively to find mutually agreeable solutions to 
address all outstan ding concerns regarding the dispute settlement system.  
7.11.   The representat ive of Singapore  noted that, the interest of time, she would not repeat but wou ld 
merely refer to the points it  had made under the previous agenda item that also pertain ed to  the 
current agenda item. With regard to WT/GC/W/754/Rev. 2, as had been  stated in Paragraph 1.5 , its 
core aim was the immediate initiation of a solution -focused process allowing for targeted discussions 
on dispute settlement issues particularly the issue of adding to or diminishing rights or obligations 
under the WTO Agreement.  
7.12.   As Aust ralia had just said, it was not the proponents'  intention to pre -judge the  scope of the 
concerns that had  been o r the possible action that could  be taken to respond to such concerns. For WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 42 - 
 
  instance, the  ideas in Canada's paper on that  particular  issue contai ned in JOB/GC/201 were  possible 
examples for consideration in any future discussions to be conducted under the auspices of the General 
Council. Singapore sincerely hoped there would  be constructive engagement on that issue and was  
keen to engage all intere sted Members in the discussions.  
7.13.   The representative of Canada  welcomed  the communication s et out in WT/GC/W/754/Rev.2 on 
"Adjudicative B odies adding to or diminishing rights or obligations under the WTO Agreement " which 
Canada had co -sponsored. Canada ackn owledge d that concerns regarding "adding to or diminishing 
the rights or obligations under the WTO Agreement  by panels and the Appellate Body " had been raised. 
The effecti veness of the discussions o n dispute settlement reform would  be improved by covering the 
full breadth of co ncerns that had been raised. Canada therefore agree d that it would be important to 
ensure that future discussions include d consideration of concerns around adding to or diminishing the 
rights or obligations and possible solutions.  
7.14.   In that regard, Canada supported  the immediate launching of a process that would  facilitate 
such discussions between Member s. Such an approach would enable them to better understand t he 
concerns and questions as they consider ed pathways forward. Canada  considered that the  process 
could be complementary to other initiatives under way and looked forward to hearing the views of 
others on the communication.  
7.15.   The representative of Switzerland  considered  that the different communications on the dispu te 
settlement sy stem were a testament  to the  large desire to start a d ialogue and find solutions. It was 
in that  spirit that Switzerland had decided to co -sponsor  the proposal that Australia had just presented . 
Without prejudging its  position regarding the substantive iss ues in the p roposals, Switzerland 
recognised  the need to have a discussion as soon as possible on all the concerns whic h had  been 
expressed on the dispute settlement sys tem including the issues which we re specifically mentioned in 
the communication which A ustralia had  just introduced. As had been indicated earlier on, Switzerland 
was in favour of setting up a process aimed at fin ding concrete solutions to tho se concerns while 
preserving the integrity of the dispute settlement system.  
7.16.   The representative of Costa Rica  said that the time had  come to seek pragmatic sol utions to 
the concerns that had  been raised about the functioning o f the dispute settlement system  including 
those relating to panels and the Appellate Body "adding to or diminishing rights or obli gations under 
the WTO A greement". In that regard, the goal wa s to begin a discussion to identify the best way or 
ways to address that and other issues  from a solution -oriented approach.  
7.17.   The representative of  the United States  thanked  the proponents for their statem ent and share d 
their concern about Appellate Body overreach. For many years, the Unit ed States and other Members 
had been sounding the alarm about the Appellate Body adding to or diminishing rights or obligations 
under the W TO Agreement in areas as varied as subsidies, antidumping and countervailing duties, 
standards under the TBT Agreement, and safeguards.  
7.18.   The United States  also agree d that it was " the collective responsibility of all Members to ensure 
the proper functioning  of the WTO dispute settlement system, includ ing the Appellate Body." In that 
regard, the United States  looked forward to further discussions with the pro ponents and other 
Members on tho se critical issues of Appellate Body overreach.  
7.19.   The representative of Brazil  share d a few remarks on the communication from Australia and 
Singapore, aimed at addressing concerns about panels and the Appellate Body's  supposedly a dding to 
or diminishing Members'  rights or  obligations under WTO rules. Brazil  thank ed the propone nts for their 
contribution  to solving the current crisis in the dispute settlement system.  
7.20.   Brazil's thoughts on the issue would be guided by the same idea it had  proposed in the previous 
discussion:  filling the vacancies in the Appellate Body was  the most  important and u rgent priority. In 
that regard, Brazil fe lt that a discussion on "overreach" of the "Adjucative Bodies" , would present the 
risk of delaying rather than expediting the selecti on processes.  
7.21.   It was, to begin with, a much more difficult and flu id subject than those raised in the previously 
discussed pr oposals. While tho se essentially deal t with procedural iss ues and the functioning of the 
dispute settlement system, the question of "overreach" could  include subs tantive and cross -cutting 
issues  which would require long and complex discussions.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 43 - 
 
  7.22.   Brazil share d some of its views on the issue. In essence, it was  not fully convinced that there 
was a problem of "overreach"  in the dispute settlement  system. Legal reasoning at that level wa s 
always detailed  and elaborate. Brazil  demand ed no less of Appellate Body m embers. Very elabo rate 
and lengthy submissions were common practice a nd all of them invoke d prece dents. Members whose 
claims had  prevaile d in a particular situation would tend to praise an AB decis ion while the other party 
would  tend to find fault with one or more aspects of the report or decision' s legal reas oning. The 
important principle was that Members had  all committed to respecting the legitimacy of the process.  
7.23.   To put it differently, the ris ks inv olved in trying to address the issue, in terms of the 
independence of the pa nels and the Appellate Body, could  be greater tha n the potential benefits. The 
Appellate Body was not infallible and it had  never claimed to be. The DSU, however, and, more broadly, 
the Marrakesh Agreement, already provide d for approp riate checks and balances – such as  the DSB 
process itself.  
7.24.   The other was touched upon in the proposal which wa s the possibility of authoritative  
interpretations. The issues that would be subject to such a negotiating process  under the Marrakesh 
Agreement were in themselves however potentially  very controversial as well as it was widely known. 
Brazil was therefore  sceptical that that  would lead Mem bers to a clear path towards resolving the 
Appellate Body  crisis.  
7.25.   Regarding the proposed discussion on the proper balance between the DSB and the adj udicative 
bodies , Brazil thought, as had already  been implied, that the balance had  already  been struck in the 
negotiations leading to the Mar rakesh Agreement. O ne approach suggested under the previous agenda 
item, of annual mee tings between the DSB and the Appellate Body , would represe nt a better 
alternative. It did  not seek to rebalance  the two main pillars o f the dispute settlement system  but 
would provide an opportunity for joint reflection.   
7.26.    Brazil stressed that their focus should be on restoring the dispute settlement system and the 
Appellate Body  to its full strength.   
7.27.   The representative of Uganda  thanked Australia, Singapore and Costa Rica for  their paper on 
having a targeted discussion on the question of the dispute settlement body. It was clear that the 
WTO was being decapitated under Members'  very eyes when the DSB wa s being destabilised by some 
Members for ulterior motives. In debating  on the proposals put forward by some Members to improve  
the function ing of the DSB and the Appellate Body, it was Members' immediate task to use the existing 
structure to save the DSB from being made irrelevant and fr om collapsing.  
7.28.   The representative of Japan  expressed  its appreciation to Australia, Singapore, Costa Rica, 
Canada and Switzerland for their communication , and shared  their view that it was " the collective 
responsibility of all Members to ensure the proper  functioning of th e WTO dispute settlement system" . 
7.29.   Japan also acknowledged that, for a number of years , concerns had  been raised by Members 
about the functioning of the dispute sett lement system, some of which could  be more difficult to 
resolve than others. One of such specific concerns was  about WTO adjudicators adding to or 
diminishing the rights and obligations  under the WTO Agreement which Japan had mentioned 
previously in relation  to the co re "unaddressed"  issues.  
7.30.   With such cha llenges in mind, Japan welcomed the initiative of the co -sponsors which proposed 
the "immediate initiation of a solution -focused process a llowing for targeted discussion" to address 
those specific concerns. It was also important for Member s to leave open many options in their 
discussion to address those concerns  as had been  elaborated in paragraphs 1.6 and 1.7 of the 
communication.  
7.31.   Japan agreed  that, as the issues un derlying the specific concerns we re multifaceted i n nature, 
no single mean s could resolve the concerns. That process could  take place in parallel with, or 
independently of, the process just discussed under the previous agenda item. Japan wa s flexible on 
the form of the process , as long as the form would ensur e the meaningful dis cussions . Japan  was of 
the view that the  process should be initiated as soon as possible.  
7.32.   The Chairman  recalled that as he had  said under the previous item, there wa s a general view 
that the ma tter of the Appellate Body needed  to be addressed very urgently  and that more focused WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 44 - 
 
  discussion was needed. As he had said under the previous item, he propose d that an informal process 
be set up under the auspices of the General Coun cil to allow focused discussion. He would be available 
the following week to hear del egations' views and would subsequently offer concrete suggestions.  
7.33.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
8  ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE  SPECIAL COMPULSORY LICENSING SYSTEM – PARAGRAPH 7 OF 
THE ANNEX TO THE AME NDED TRIPS AGREEMENT  AND PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE DE CISION ON 
THE IMPLEMENTATION O F PARAGRAPH 6 OF THE  DOHA DECLARATION ON  THE TRIPS 
AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC  HEALTH (WT/L/540 AN D WT/L/540/CORR.1) – REPORT OF THE 
COUNCIL FOR TRIPS (I P/C/82)  
8.1.  The Chairman  recalled that i n August 2003, the General Council  had adopt ed a Decision on the 
Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health. 
In addition, the General Council  had adopted, in December 2005, a Protocol Amendin g the TRIPS 
Agreement, which had been  submitted to Member s for acceptance. In accordance with Article 10:3 of 
the WTO Agreement, the Protocol  had entered into force on 23 January 2017, upon acceptance by 
two-thirds of the WTO Members. Both the amended TRIPS Agreement and the 2003 Decision provide d 
that the TRIPS  Council should  review annually the functioning of the system a nd should  also report on 
its operation to the General Council.  
8.2.  Ambassador Walter Werner (Germany), Chairman of the TRIPS Council , recalled that  the 
Amendment to the TRIPS Agreement had entered  into force in January 2017. It added  a secure legal 
pathway to access affordable medicines to the TRIPS Agreement for the  benefit of countries which 
relied  on imports of medical technologies because of insufficient or no domestic pharmaceutical 
manufactur ing capacities.  
8.3.  At its meeting of 8 -9 November, the TRIPS Council had proceeded with  the annual review 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 Hea lth. 
8.4.  The TRIPS Council's r eport to the General Council had  been circulated in document IP/C/82. It 
included  information about the implementation and use of the System, as well as on the status of 
acceptances of the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement. Th e record of the discussion that had 
taken  place during the Council's review of the System wa s also attached to the report.  
8.5.  He was also pleased to inform Members that, since the adoption of the report by the TRIPS 
Council , Georgia had  accepted the Protocol Amending the TRIPS A greement. To date, 127 Members 
were thus bound by the amended TRIPS Agreement.  
8.6.  That left 37 Members that we re yet to complete their domestic acceptance procedures.  The 
current deadline to do so was 31 December 2019. He again called upon  those Members to expedite 
action.  A practical guide o n how to accept the Protocol had been attached to the letter that he had  
addressed to them in August, and wa s also available on the WTO's webpage on TRIPS and Public 
Health. The WTO Secretariat remained  available for any a ssistance or guidance that could be needed 
in that  regard.  
8.7.  The General Council took note  of the report of the TRIPS Council in document IP/C/82 and of the 
TRIPS Council Chairman's statement.  
9  WAIVERS UNDER ARTICL E IX OF THE WTO AGRE EMEN T  
9.1  Introduction o f Harmonized System 2002 Changes into WTO Schedules o f Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision  (G/C/W/756)  
9.2  Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision (G/C/W/757)  
9.3  Introduction of Har monized System 2012 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision (G/C/W/758)  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 45 - 
 
  9.4  Introduction of Harmonized System 2017 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision (G/C/W/759/Rev .1) 
9.1.  The Chairman  said that the draft wa iver decisions listed in sub -items (a) to (d) of the current 
agenda item had been  taken up for consideration by the Council for Trade in Goods at its November 
meeting. For tho se items, the  Chairman of the Goods Council wa s required to report to the Gener al 
Council.  
9.2.  Ambassador Stephen de Boer (Canada), Chairman of the Goods Council , report ed that the 
Council for Trade in Goods, at it s meeting of 12 -13 November , had considered and had approved four 
collective waiver requests relating to the introduction of Ha rmonized System changes into W TO 
Schedules of Concessions. Tho se four  collective waiver requests had been  discussed at the Market 
Access Com mittee meeting on 9 October and had been  forwarded to the CTG for its consideration.  
9.3.  The four collective  waiver requests we re extensions to the current waivers on the introduction of 
Harmonized System 2002, 2007, 2012, and 2017 changes into WT O Schedules of Concessions and 
were contained in the documents listed in the airgram of that day's meeting ( G/C/W/756 ; G/C/W/757; 
G/C/W/758; and G/C/W/759/Rev.1).  
9.4.  The CTG had recommended that the draft waiver decisions contained in the above -mentioned 
waiver requests be forwarded to the General  Council for adoption.  
9.5.  The Chairman  said that u nless delegations wish ed to com ment on the draft decisions, he  
propose d that the General Council adopt ed tho se four draft Decis ions referred to by Ambassador de  
Boer in his report, and which relate d to the Introduction of Harmonized System 2002, 2007, 2012 and 
2017 changes into WTO Sche dules of Tariff Concessions.  
9.6.  The General Council so agreed8. 
9.5  Review of Waivers pursuant to Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement  
9.5.1   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)  
9.5.2   Cuba – Article XV:6 – Extension of waiver, granted on 7 December 2016 until 31 
December 2021 (WT/L/1003, WT/L/1043)  
9.5.3   European Union – Application of Autonomous Preferential Treatment to the Western 
Balkans, granted on 7  December 2016 until 31 December 2021 (WT/L/1002, WT/L/1044)  
9.5.4   United States – African Growth and Opportunity Act, granted on 30 November 2015 
until 30 September 2025 (WT/L/9 70, WT/L/1045, WT/L/1045/Corr.1 ) 
9.5.5   United States – Former Trust Territory of the Pacif ic Islands, granted on 7 December 
2016 until 31 December 2026 (WT/L/1000, WT/L/1046)  
9.5.6   United States – Trade Preferences granted to Nepal, granted on 7 December 2016 
until 31 December 2025 (WT/L/1001, WT/L/1047)  
9.7.  The Chairman  recalled that i n 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 terminates." There 
were six waivers before the Genera l Council for review, and they we re listed in the proposed Agenda. 
Five of the waivers under review provide d that an annual report should be submitted by the Member 
concerned regarding the operation or implementation of th ose waivers with a view to facilitating their 
annual  review by the General Council.  The reports from Cuba and the European Union and the three 
reports from the United States had  been circulated in documents WT/L/1043, WT/L/1044, WT/L/1045 
and WT/L/1045/Cor r.1, WT/L/1046 and WT/L/1047.  
                                                
8 The decision s were  subsequently circulated in WT/L/1048, WT/L/1049, WT/L/1050 and WT/L/1051 . WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 46 - 
 
  9.8.  The representative of Montenegro  thank ed the European Union for the extension of the 
Autonomous Preferential Treatment to the Western Balkans granted until Dec ember 2021. The 
European Union wa s Montenegro's leading trade partn er and a strong supporter of econo mic activities 
in Montenegro. Montenegro was yet  to achieve the full potential of its bilateral trade and that 
preferential treatment would help . 
9.9.  The General Council took note  of the reports contained in documents WT/L/1043, WT/L/1044, 
WT/L/1045 and WT/L/1045/Corr.1, WT/L/1046 and WT/L/1047  and of the statement.  
10  COMMITTEE ON BUDGET,  FINANCE AND ADMINIS TRATION – REPORT ON MEETINGS OF 
JULY, SEPTEMBER AND NOVEMBER 2018 (WT/BF A/174, WT/BFA/175, W T/BFA/176)  
10.1.   The Chairman  drew attention to the reports of the Budget Committee in do cuments 
WT/BFA/174, WT/BFA/ 175 and WT/BFA/ 176 and invite d the Chairman of the Budget Committee to 
introduce the reports.  
10.2.   Ambassador Juan Aguirre (Paraguay), Chairman of the Budget Committee , introd uced the 
reports of the meetings of the CBFA that had taken place on 25  July ( WT/BFA/174), 13  September 
(WT/BFA/175) and 13 November (WT/BFA/176).  
10.3.   The Committee had received updates of the financial situatio n of the regular budget of the 
organization and trust funds for the second and third  quarters o f 2018. The expenditure rate had been  
in line with expectations. There wa s however a marked decline in contributions to the Doha 
Development Agenda Global Trust Fund. Furthermore, the Standards and Tr ade Devel opment Facility 
would need additional contributions to cover more projects.  
10.4.   The Secretariat had presented the key elements of the risk management system of the WTO 
Secretariat. Critical risks had been  highlighted together with suggested mitigating actions . 
10.5.   The Committee  had received the 2017 annual report on divers ity in the WTO Secretariat which 
detailed  the composition of staff in t erms of nationality and gender from 1995 to the end of 2017. 
Continued improvement in the representati on of developing count ries and least -developed c ountries 
as well as significant improvement in gender diversity at the pro fessional staff grade levels had been  
highlighted.  
10.6.   Discussions had been  held on the subject of extrabudgetary funds and the financial regul ations 
pertainin g to them. That subject wa s still under discussions between the Secretariat and some 
Members. An update would  be provided at the appropriate time.  
10.7.   Mid-term reviews of the WTO and ITC f or the 2018 -2019 budget cycle had been  presented to 
the Committee.  
10.8.   The ITC had informed the Committee of plans by the United Nations  to move from the biennial 
budgetin g cycle to an annual cycle. That would  have an effect on the mode of presentation of the ITC's 
2020-2021 budge t to the WTO. The Committee would be updated of t hat in early 2019 as consultations 
were still in progress and an approach wa s to be mapped out.  
10.9.   The bud get for the WTO for 2019 remained  unchanged at CHF 197.2 million. The scale of 
contributions for 2019  had been  determined on the basis of updated trade statistics.  
10.10.   The Committee wa s submitting the following recommendation: "The Committee recommends 
that the General Council approve the Members' Scale of Contributions for 2019 as presented in 
paragraph 7.1 and Tabl e 9 of the Document WT/BFA/W/465."  
10.11.   The Committee had  had extensive deliberations on the subject of the WTO Accumulated 
Budgetary Surplus. The Committee had determined that the most appropriate allocation of the 
accumulated budgetary surplus would be to ful ly transfer the concerned amount to the Working Capital 
Fund as that addressed  various considerations that had been tabled by Members.  
10.12.   The Committee was  submitting the following recommendations to the General Council: "The 
Committee on Budget , Finance and  Administration (CBFA) recommends to the General Council that WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 47 - 
 
  the WTO Accumulated Budgetary Surplus as at 31 December 2017, amounting to CHF 52.026 million, 
be transferred to the Working Capital Fund.  The CBFA further recommends that advances foreseen to 
be made by the Director -General under Financial Regulation 26(b) will be considered by the CBFA, 
which will make a recommendation to the General Council for its prior authorization. "  
10.13.   With reference to Financial Regulation 27, the replenishment of sums take n from the amounts 
transferred from the WTO Accumulated Budgetary Surplus, and advanced to cover extraordinary 
expenditure, as per Financial Regulation 26(b), would  require a decision by the General Council on 
recommendation by the CBFA.  
10.14.   The Committee had reviewed the 2017 annual report on the overall grade structure and 
promotions within the Secretariat. The average grade wa s trendin g downwards as the Secretariat wa s 
carefully monitoring the grade structure by recruiting  at lower grades as vacancies ca me u p when 
previous incumbents, at higher grades, separate d from the Secretariat.  
10.15.   The Secretariat had presented the background of historical records relating to the GATT, dating 
from the mid -1940s to the end of 1995, and had suggested a procedure for disclosu re of GATT non -
official materials.  
10.16.   The Committee submitted  the following recommendation: "The Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administration recommends to the General Council to agree the procedures for disclosure of GATT 
non-official materials. " 
10.17.   As per the request of a Member, the Secretariat  had provided some factual internal data 
related to meetings of regular and negotiating bodies and documents prepa red or issued by each body. 
That document had been  circulated for information purposes only, without p rejudice to Members' 
positions, rights and obligations in the WTO or to the mandates of the v arious bodies to which it 
referred . The Committee had noted that the information wa s a basic compilation of what the divisions 
had forwarded to the coordinator on the basis of their account of the various activities.  
10.18.   The General Council took note  of the statement, approved  the Budget Committee's specific 
recommendation in paragraphs 2.13, 3.14 to 3.16 an d 4.18 of WT/BFA/176, and adopted  the three 
reports.  
11  INTERNATI ONAL TRADE CENTRE UN CTAD/WTO – REPORT OF THE JOINT  ADVISORY 
GROUP ON ITS 52ND SE SSION (ITC/AG(LII)/2 72) 
11.1.   The Chairman  said that the Chairman of the CTD provided  the General Council with a report on 
the CTD's consideration of the report of the Joint Advisory  Group on the International Trade Centre 
UNCTAD/WTO. He therefore invite d the Chairm an of the CTD to report on the matter.  
11.2.   Ambassador Diego Aulestia (Ecuador), Chairman of the CTD , refer red Members to the 26th 
Session of the CTD, which had been  held on 7 and 8 July 1999, and the minutes of which we re 
contained in document WT/COMTD/M/26. At that meeting, the Chairperson had informed Members 
that, on the basis of informal consultations, it had been agreed that it would be useful for the CTD to 
examine and take note of the report of the ITC Joi nt Advisory Group, before it had been  forwarded to 
the General Council.  
11.3.   Since that time, therefore, the CTD had  been the WTO body to which the  Joint Advisory Group 
report had been presented. It wa s the CTD tha t subsequently forwarded  the report to the Ge neral 
Council for adoption. It was accordingly in that context that he, as the Chairman of the CTD, was 
introducing the Joint Advisory Group report to the General Council that day.  
11.4.   The ITC's Joint Advisory Group  had held its 52nd Session on 10 July. The report on that meeting 
was contained in document ITC/AG(52)/272.  
11.5.   The report had been  presented to the CTD at its 107th Session on 21 November by the Chairman 
of the Joint Advisory Group, Ambassador Alvaro Cedeño M olinari of Costa Rica.   
11.6.   Ambassador Cedeño had informed the CTD that delegations at the Joint Advisory Group meeting 
had expressed appreciation for the ITC's focus on its priority countries. Indeed, as  had been  indicated WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 48 - 
 
  in the ITC's Annual Report for 2017,  86 percent of country -specific interventions we re being channelled 
to LDCs, sub -Saharan Africa, landlocked developing countries, small island developing states, small 
vulnerable economies, and post -conflict and fragile states.  
11.7.   Appreciation had  also been expressed by the Joint Advisory Group for a number of key areas 
of the ITC's work – including trade facilitation; addressing non -tariff measures; strengthening trade 
and investment support institutions; and integrating micro, small and medium -sized enterpri ses into 
global value chains.  
11.8.   Among the other areas for which delegations at the Joint Advisory Group meeting  had expressed  
their support included the ITC' s emphasis on promoting inclusive and sustainable trade and economic 
growth; the organization's effe ctive advocacy and thought leadership on women's economic 
empowerment – notably, the SheTrades initiative, and the piloting of the Buenos Aires Declaration on 
Women and Trade; and finally, the ITC's suite of tools and solutions – for example, the SME Trade  
Helpdesk and the Export Potential Map, among others.   
11.9.   The areas identified by the Joint Advisory Group for further improvement had related, inter alia, 
to sustainability, impact, and objective setting. Delegations had also recommended the collection of 
better data, which would in turn contribute to b etter project design. A call had been  made for a 
continued focus on improving results, impact, and cost -effectiveness, while ensuring scale.  
11.10.   Finally, Ambassador Cedeño had informed the CTD that delegations at  the Joint Advisory 
Group meeting had called for continued and increased un -earmarked funding to allow the organization 
to plan for the future , to address demand as it arose , and to invest in innovation and business 
development. The ITC had been  encouraged  to be fully involved in the reform of the United Nations 
Development System.  
11.11.   As was  the practice, the CTD had taken note of the JAG report  and had agreed to forward it 
to the General Council for adoption.  
11.12.   The representative of the International Trade Cent re, speaking as an Observer , said that a s 
Members would  have already seen the report, the ITC would just briefly  thank  all Members  for the 
continued support to its work on behalf of Arancha González , the  Executive Director  of the 
International Trade Centre , and on behalf of the team at the ITC.  
11.13.   Despite a relatively tough year for multilateralism, the ITC had  continued to grow both in 
terms of delivering innovative solutions and in terms of thought leadersh ip. Thanks to the support of 
its traditional funder s and a number of new funders including the private sector, the ITC had  a very 
healthy pipeline. The ITC thanked them for their trust in the Centre to deliver results and to do so in 
a transparent an d accountable manner. And to its  clients and partners, including many of the 
developing count ries in the room at the meeting, the ITC  thank ed them  for continuing to partner with 
the Centre as it  deliver ed inclusive trade solutions for thei r SMEs and policy -makers especially for thei r 
women -owned businesses.  
11.14.   In 2018, the ITC had had its largest ever delivery of extra -budgetary funds and had 
successfully met and exceeded its m ost ambitious impact targets. The ITC  expect ed that in 2019, 
based on its funding projections and its increased demand, the Centre was  likely to reach a new peak 
in del ivery – the highest level in its  more than fifty years of ex istence. Life really did begin again at 
50. The ITC thanked the Members again for their continued partnership and support.  
11.15.   The Chairman  said that i n light of the CTD's consideration and action on the matter, and the 
CTD report that had just been heard , and unless any delegation wo uld like to take the floor, he invite d 
the General Council to adopt the report of the Joint Advisory Group in document ITC/AG(52)/272 and 
to tak e note of the statements . 
11.16.   The General Council so agreed . WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 49 - 
 
  12  REVIEW OF WTO ACTIVI TIES  
12.1  General Council (WT/GC/W/751), Dispute Settlement Body (WT/DSB/76), and Trade 
Policy Review Body (WT/TPR/426)  
12.2  Sectoral Councils (G/L/1282, G/L/1282/Add.1, S/C/55, and IP/C/81 ) and 
Committee on Technical Barriers to Trade (G/L/1281), Committee on Agriculture 
(G/L/1283), and Committee on Customs Valuation (G/L/1284)  
12.3  Committees on Trade and Development (WT/COMTD/97), Trade and Environment 
(WT/CTE/25), Balance -of-Payments Restrict ions (WT/BOP/R/116), Budget, Finance and 
Administration (WT/BFA/177), and Regional Trade Agreements (WT/REG/29)  
12.4  Working Groups on Trade, Debt and Finance (WT/WGTDF/17) and Trade and Transfer 
of Technology (WT/WGTTT/20)  
12.5  Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements (GPA/AR/1, WT/L/1041 – 
TCA/14)  
12.1.   The Chairman  drew attention to the reports listed under the current agenda  item which had  
been prepared in line with the Decision concerning Procedures for an Annual Overview of WTO 
Activities and for Reporti ng under the WTO (WT/L/105). He also noted  that the Committee on Technical 
Barriers to Trade, the Committee on Agriculture and the Committee on Customs Valuation had met 
after t he Council for Trade in Goods and for that  reason, the Annual Report of those Committees had  
been forwarded directly to the General Council.  
12.2.   First, he invite d the General Council to adopt the report of the Committee on Trade and 
Development in document WT/COMTD/97, and to take note of the reports of the other WTO bodies, 
including t he reports of the Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements, listed in the Proposed 
Agenda.  
12.3.   The General Council so agreed . 
12.4.   The Chairman  then propose d that the General Council adopt ed the draft Report of the General 
Council contained in document WT /GC/W/751, on the understanding that  the Secretariat would  make 
the necessary adjustments to that Rep ort to include matters that had been considered at that  meeting.  
12.5.   The General Council so agreed9. 
13  APPOINTMENT OF OFFIC ERS TO WTO BODIES – ANNOUNCEMENT BY TH E CHAIRMAN 
PURSUANT TO PARAGRAP H 7.1(A) OF THE GUID ELINES (WT/L/510)  
13.1.   The Chairman  recall ed that the relevant Guidelines provided that the outgoing General Council 
Chairman conduct ed consultations on the appointment of chairpersons to the WTO bodies in Grou ps 
1, 2, 4 and 5 of its Annex. The g uidelines also stipulated that the selection process should start with 
the Chair's announcement at the last regular Genera l Council meeting of the year. He would  be 
assisted in the selection process by the serving DSB Ch air, Ambassador Kangvalkulkij.  
13.2.   A list o f past Chairs of major bodies was  available to delegations at that meeting. He stress ed 
that again in accordance with the Guidelines, representatives of Members in financial ar rears for over 
one full year could not ho wever be considered for appointment.  
13.3.   As he had stated at the October meeting, he would  begin the consultations early in January. He  
therefore encourage d the four group coordinators – (i) Africa, (ii) Asia and the Pacific; (iii) Latin 
America and the Caribb ean, and (iv) developed countries – to already begin their proce ss of internal 
consultations so that they could  be in a position to present names in early January.  
                                                
9 The 2018  Annual Report of the General Council was subs equently circulated in WT/GC/200 . WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 50 - 
 
  13.4.   He and his colleague would  begin the process with a collectiv e meeting of group coordinator s 
and would also subsequently indicate a specifie d time -period in which they would  be available to hear 
the views of all interested delegations.  
13.5.   Furthermore, and as delegations would recall, at its October meeting, he had  reported that 
consultations had  still been ongoing regarding the Chairmanships of the CTE and CTE SS, which had 
become vacant further to the departure of their res pective Chairs. Since October, he had continued 
his consultat ions in an effort to fill in tho se vacancies before the end of the  year, but unfortunately an 
agreement could not be reached.  
13.6.   The upcoming appointments cycle would therefore  include the vacancy in the Chairmanships of 
the CTE SS as well as any other vacancy in t he negotiating bodies that could arise, and it would  take 
up the vacancy in the Chairmanship of the CTE together with the Chairmanships of the rest of the 
regular bodies.  
13.7.   The General Council took note  of the Chairman's statement . 
14  OTHER BUSINESS  
14.1  G20 Work on Trade a nd Investmen t – Statement b y Argentina  
14.1.   The representative of Argentina , speaking under "Other Business" , said that Argentina  wished  
to report on its  work as G20 President with respect to trade and investment.  
14.2.   Over the course of the year, Argenti na's goal, as G20 President, had been  to contribut e to 
dialogue and consensus -building as the path towards global economic stability and sustainable 
development. At the Ele venth Ministerial Conference, Members had  agreed that dialo gue, and not just 
negotiation, was part of thei r work.  
14.3.   That same spirit had guided Argentina as G20 President, and it had  stressed the path  of 
cooperation and dialogue. Argentina was  pragmatic, moving forward on the basis of  a blueprint that 
would allow them  to take small but firm steps. Argentina  continue d to believe in consensu s as the 
path for reaching legitimate decisions.  
14.4.   In times of global ec onomic uncertainty, Argentina's work wa s informed by the conviction that 
trade had  never been as important as it was at present  for economic growth, productivity, innovation, 
job creatio n and development. The world had  never be en more interdependent than it was that day. 
And international cooperation had  never been as necessary for achieving inclusive and sustained 
economic growth.  
14.5.   Consequently, Argentina had  proposed a forward -looking ag enda, with the aim of building 
agreements that support ed a fairer and more inclusive multilateral trad ing system. Argentina had  also 
established clear priorities: the future of work, infrastructure for development an d a sustainable food 
future. Tho se prior ities had translated  into questions related to agro -food global value chains and the 
effects of the New Industrial Revolution on trade and international investment flows, and into a 
dialogue on the challenges of the multilateral trading system.  
14.6.   With the su pport of G20 m embers and invited countries, they  had come with  a Minist erial level 
consensus document on 14 September w hereby the G20 members had committed to work together 
to enhance sustainable economic growth, keep markets open, address economic develop ment and to 
reinvigorate the international trading system. At the same time, the statement had recognis ed the 
need to step up dialogue and actions to mitigate risks and enhance confidence in international trade.  
14.7.   In the G20 Buenos Aires Declaration dated 1 December 2018, leaders recognised that there 
was room for improvement in the multilateral trading system and they had supported reform of the 
WTO to improve its functioning (paragraph 27).  
14.8.   Ten years ago, the G20 had proven  to be an effective forum for coordinating the international 
efforts needed to face the world's biggest economic and financial crisis since 1930. Like ten years ago, 
as G20 Preside nt, Argentina had  tried to make a significant contribution to current global  challenges WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 51 - 
 
  by working  to find alternatives that would enable them  to face the challenges together and to take 
advantage  of the opportu nities the 21st century presented . 
14.9.   Argentina  hoped that the current  discussion s would  provide a basis for dealing frankly  and 
constructively with issues that we re of interest to all Members.  
14.10.   Argentina noted that b oth the Leaders' Declaration and the Trade and Inve stment Ministers' 
Statement would  be circulated shortly to all Members.10 
14.11.   The General Council took note  of the statement.  
14.2  Chairmanship of the Working Parties on the Accession of Ethiopia and Sudan – 
Statement by the Chairman  
14.12.   The Chairman , speaking under "Other Business" , said that, regarding the Chairmanships of 
the Working Parties on the Accession of Ethio pia and Sudan,  Deputy  Director -General Alan Wolff had 
conducted consultations on his behalf to fill in those two vacancies . In that regard, he  referred to a 
communication dated  8 October in which Members had been  invited to su bmit nominations. Following 
that, a process of consultations had taken place and Members had been  provided a further opportunity 
to make comments on the proposed candidates in a recent communication dated 28 November.  
14.13.   In light of that process, he was pleased to co nfirm that there appea red to be consensus on 
the appointment of Ambassador Morten Jespersen, Permanent Representative of Denmark to chair 
the Working Party on the Accession of Ethiopia and Mr. Katsuro Nagai, Deputy Permanent 
Representative of Japan to chair the Working Pa rty on  the Accession of Sudan. He  wished them all the 
best in that  new endeavour.  
14.14.   The representative of Sudan , speaking as an Observer , welcome d the selection of the new 
Working Party Chairman, Mr. Katsuro Nagai, and would like to express thanks and gratitude to the 
outgoing C hairman – Mr. Ryosuke Kuwana. Sudan also thanked the Secretariat, the Deputy Director -
General and the Accessions Division f or their continuous cooperation. Sudan would also like to thank  
the Government of Japan for its  continuous support and for the technical assistance provided to Sudan 
in its effort to join the WTO. Sudan also thanked  the Working Party Members for their cont inuous 
constructive engagement. Sudan supported the statements made by the African and the LDC Groups  
and would like to express its commitmen t to join the multilateral trading  system and to go through 
the necessary domestic reform exerting all possible eff ort despite economic difficulties.  
14.15.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
14.3  Statement by the Chairman in connection with Administrative Measures for Members 
in Arrears  
14.16.   The Chairman , speaking under "Other Business" , noted that the revised Administra tive 
Measures for Members in arrears in WT/BFA/132 required that, at the end of each meeting of the 
General Council, the Chairman of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration should 
provide information with regard to which Members and Observers w ere under Administrative 
Measures. He invited the Chairman  of the Budget Committee  to provide the Council with that 
information.  
14.17.   Ambassador Juan Aguirre (Paraguay), Chairman of the CBFA , reported that the General 
Council approved the rules for Members and Observers subject to Administrative Measures and that 
those had been implemented on 1 March 2013. As required by the decision of the General Council, 
the Chairman of the CBFA would state all Members and Observers under all categories of 
Administrative Meas ures as of 10 December 2018 . 
14.18.   There were 5 Members and 1 Observer in Category 1: Belize; Congo; Suriname; Uganda; 
Zambia and Somalia (Observer). There were 3 Members and no Observer in Category 2: Antigua and 
Barbuda; Cameroon and Guinea. There were 6 Membe rs and 2 Observers in Category 3: Burundi; 
                                                
10 The G20 Leaders' Declaration and the  G20 Trade and Investment Ministers' Statement  were subsequently 
circulated in documents WT/L/1053 and WT/L/1052, respectively.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 52 - 
 
  Chad; Guinea -Bissau; Niger; Sierra Leone; Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela; Libya  (Observer) and 
Sao Tomé and Principe (Observer).  
14.19.   The Chairman  said that he was required at each Council meeting to request Members and 
Observers in Categories II and III of the Measures to inform the Secretariat as to when their payment 
of arrears could be expected. Likewise, the General Council urged Members and Observers under 
Administrative Measures to liquidate their arrears.  
14.20.   The General Council took note  of the statements.  
 
_______________  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 53 - 
 
  ANNEX 1  
THE REPORTS BY THE D IRECTOR -GENERAL AND THE CHAIRS OF THE NE GOTIATING 
GROUPS AT THE INFORM AL TNC AND INFORMAL HOD S MEETING S 
HELD ON 10 DECEMB ER 2018  
Report by the Director -General1 
In beginning my statement, I would like to put on record my thanks to all the Chairs for their efforts 
and hard work. They are doing their best to encourage members and  set up a structure of work that 
allows for engagement. Please use those opportunities to engage fully.  
 
I note in particular the intensive work being done on fisheries subsidies by the Negotiating Group on 
Rules under the leadership of Ambassador Zapata.  2019 will be a crucial year for these negotiations. 
And although work is progressing well, I want to stress that we should not be complacent. An outcome 
here will not come easily – we will all have to be prepared to work hard to get there. So, let's be re ady 
for that.  
 
We must also strive to advance other important and longstanding issues such as agriculture, public 
stockholding, services, development and all other areas. As ever, the Chairs and I remain at your 
disposal to assist you in any way that we c an in the work ahead.   
 
Since my last report, there have been several important events and gatherings around the world that 
have discussed topics relevant to this Organization and which impact our work. I was invited to a 
number of these gatherings, so le t me give you a quick overview.  
 
You will recall that at our last meeting, the Canadian delegation informed members that an informal 
gathering of Ministers would be held in Ottawa in October to discuss the subject of WTO reform.  
 
At their invitation, I a ttended this meeting.  I understand that Canada will be saying more about this 
meeting. I would just add that I found it positive to see the high levels of engagement in the debate 
about the WTO and its key role in global trade. And in discussing reform is sues, I was pleased that 
there was a strong recognition from all those participating that it was essential that all WTO members' 
views were taken into account. On the margins of this meeting, I also met with Prime Minister Justin 
Trudeau to discuss the sta te of global trade and the emerging discussions about reform of the WTO.  
 
In November, I joined China's President, Xi Jinping at the opening session of the China International 
Import Expo, in Shanghai. During the same visit, I participated – together with the heads of other 
International Organizations in a roundtable meeting hosted by Chinese Premier Li Keqiang. We 
discussed the current global economic landscape and the importance of safeguarding the multilateral 
trading system.  
 
I then joined world leaders  in Paris to mark the centenary of the World War I Armistice and to take 
part in the first Paris Peace Forum. The Forum is intended to encourage international cooperation in 
tackling global challenges and ensuring durable peace.  
 
I also participated in pr ivate discussions with President Emmanuel Macron. Also joining this meeting 
were the heads of the United Nations, the IMF, the World Bank, the ILO, UNESCO and the OECD. A 
joint Declaration was issued from this meeting recognizing that the pressing global c hallenges in terms 
of peace and security require global attention, collective responsibility and international solutions – 
including through multilateral approaches. During this visit, I also held further bilateral meetings with 
France and the EU.  
 
While these meetings were underway in Paris, APEC ministers were meeting in Papua New Guinea. 
Because of this clash of dates, I unfortunately could not attend, but I was represented there by Deputy 
Director -General Yi. Again, the systemic issues facing the WTO w ere discussed.  
 
Finally, I attended the G20 Leaders' summit in Buenos Aires. It was a productive meeting, as reflected 
in the resulting Declaration. With this statement, leaders underlined the vital importance of trade and 
of the multilateral trading syst em in supporting growth, productivity, innovation, job creation and 
                                                
1 Also issued as JOB/TNC/72.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 54 - 
 
  development. They called for improvements and "necessary reforms" to the functioning of the WTO 
to ensure that it can continue playing its essential role.  
 
I have also held numerous other  bilateral meetings with a wide range of members. In Geneva, I was 
honoured to welcome President Battulga Khatmaa of Mongolia and Prime Minister Hun Sen of 
Cambodia to the WTO.  I also met with the Coordinators of the Africa and ACP Groups, as well as 
various Ministers and delegations. And I have conducted bilateral visits to the UK, Japan, Lithuania, 
and the US.  
 
Throughout my exchanges, I heard firm support for trade and the WTO, concerns about the prospects 
for global trade, and a range of ideas about s trengthening our work. So let me turn now to these 
substantive issues.  
 
At the TPRB meeting tomorrow afternoon we will be discussing our latest monitoring report. The report 
highlights the dramatic rise in new trade restrictive measures this year. This wi ll come as a surprise 
to no one.  
 
We all must respond to this situation. As far as the WTO is concerned, we are doing all we can to 
support efforts to ease tensions, avoid further escalation and identify potential solutions. Bilateral 
efforts will be impo rtant here – but so too is pursuing resolution at the global level, through the WTO. 
It is positive that Members remain strongly engaged here and are using the system to discuss concerns 
and bring disputes where necessary.  
 
I urge Members to use all means  at their disposal to help work through existing differences.  This is 
in the interest of all our economies, businesses and citizens. We need to see more dialogue, at all 
levels.  
 
This brings me back to the topic of WTO reform or modernisation, which many  see as a way of 
responding to the tensions we are seeing, and as a way of responding to the various concerns raised. 
While there is real momentum behind the debate, I think it is still in its early stages. We are seeing 
ideas and even some proposals being  put forward. But at present it is not clear the precise direction 
that these discussions will take.  
 
It is important that all of you express your views on whether and how we should advance this 
conversation. At our last meeting, I encouraged you all – whatever your position on this subject – to 
make your voices heard.  The state of this organization is an issue in which everyone has a stake. So, 
it is vital that the discussion reflects the full range of members' interests and concerns. I think this 
discus sion has become broader and more inclusive – and I welcome that. I encourage you again to 
engage with each other and exchange views through a range of channels and formats.  
 
In this regard, I note that DDG Agah represented the Secretariat at a South -South  Dialogue for LDCs 
held last Friday – sponsored as part of the China Programme – which was focused on WTO reform.  
 
Ultimately, we are all here because we think the WTO has systemic importance, and that our 
economies are well served by cooperation on trade issues in this forum. So let's see where this 
conversation will lead. So far no one is talking about launching a new round – nothing of the kind. 
Neither have I have heard anyone suggest that we displace any of the vital issues, which rightly 
remain on the  negotiating agenda. The focus is on pragmatically fixing this invaluable system so that 
it works better for everyone.  
 
As ever, I remain available for consultations with individual members and groups of members on these 
– or any other – issues. I am here to facilitate whatever conversation members wish to pursue to 
strengthen the system for the future.  
 
Finally, in all th e current discussions, the most urgent issue facing us is the crisis in the dispute 
settlement system – in particular, the impasse in the appointments to the Appellate Body. I have 
continued my outreach to Members – both here and in capitals.   
 
At the end  of October, I consulted with several Ambassadors representing frequent users of the dispute 
settlement system and various geographical regions to hear their views on this issue. It was very 
useful, and I have continued my consultations on these issues. Wh ile we do not have any WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 55 - 
 
  breakthroughs and no solutions are immediately evident, it is positive to see that members have 
started engaging more actively by putting forward some ideas and proposals.  
 
I will be redoubling my own efforts in this area to help yo u in your conversations wherever I can.  I 
will do this in close cooperation with the General Council Chair and the DSB Chair.   
 
I urge you to do all that you can to expedite this discussion and find ways forward.  This is a real 
systemic risk and it dema nds urgent action.  And of course, my door is open to any delegation that 
wishes to talk to me about this.  
 
So, it seems that 2019 is going to be a very busy year for all of us.  In the New Year we will also be 
stepping up our preparations for MC12 in Asta na. We will be seeking to push forward negotiations on 
fisheries subsidies to meet the 2019 deadline. We will also have the expiry of the moratoria on e -
commerce and TRIPS Non -Violation – so members will need to decide what action they want to take 
there. And of course, we will be continuing to try to make progress in all other negotiating areas, and 
supporting members in the issues that they wish to bring forward.  
 
We must keep pursuing all of this work, even as we respond to the systemic issues before us . We 
have begun to respond to these issues in a very concrete way, but there is still much to do. We need 
to redouble our efforts on this front. And we must aim to turn the challenges that we face into an 
opportunity to renew and to strengthen the WTO for the years to come.  
 
This concludes my report.  
 
Reports by the Negotiating Group Chairs  
1. Committee on Agriculture – Special Session  
 
Thank you, Director General.  I would like to make a brief report on the state of play in the agriculture 
negotiations.  
 
Since  my last report to the informal meeting of the Trade Negotiation Committee on 16 October, I 
have been holding monthly issue -specific agriculture negotiation meetings, as per the schedule I 
circulated to Memb ers on 27 July.  Most recently, three thematic se ssions dedicated to Market Access 
and SSM; to Export competition, Export Restrictions and Market Access; and to Domestic Support and 
Public stockholding for Food Security Purposes (PSH) were held on 22 October, 15 November and 6 
December, respectively.   
 
Each of these sessions benefitted from submissions and presentations by Members on the issues of 
interest to them. There were, for example, submissions by Paraguay, the US and the Russian 
Federation on Market Access, by Japan and Singapore on Export Restri ctions, and by Canada on Export 
Competition and Domestic Support, and presentations by the G33 on SSM and PSH.   In addition, a 
presentation was also made by the Secretariat on the agriculture tariff landscape and the various 
online data systems that   Mem bers could consult.  There will be one more meeting this year on Cotton 
on 14 December.  
 
I am glad to report that I continue to be very satisfied with the high level of engagement by Members.  
They have demonstrated their commitment to seeking avenues to agree on trade rules that improve 
the agricultural trading system. While there is not yet any discernible change in the fundamental 
positions of Members on any of these topics that I could report at this stage, the submissions and 
presentations made by the m underline the importance of engaging in analytical work and technical 
exchanges to better understand each other’s positions in order to make progress.  
 
Based on the process and level of engagement thus far, I circulated on 3 December, ahead of the CoA 
SS on 7 December, a Way Forward  document for the period from January to April 2019 that seeks to 
intensify the discussions on the negotiating subjects.  After many bilateral consultations as well as the 
discussions on 7 December, the monthly CoA SS meetings,  based on Members' submissions and 
presentations will continue. It is foreseen that these meetings will take on 14 -15 February 2019, 14 -
15 March 2019 and 11 -12 April 2019.  
 
In addition, the deliberations of monthly meetings will be complemented by inputs f rom Members -led 
working groups open to all interested Members.  Over the coming months working groups, starting WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 56 - 
 
  with two in January will be carefully phased in, eventually addressing all seven topics in the agriculture 
negotiations, namely Domestic Support , Public Stockholding for Food Security purposes, Cotton, 
Market Access, Special Safeguard Mechanism, Export Competition and Export Restrictions.  
 
These working groups, operating under my supervision, will seek to make progress on each of the 
negotiating i ssues.  They will be chaired by co -coordinators from Members with divergent views, or if 
this is not possible, by neutral coordinators with no interest at stake. Cotton will be addressed on a 
separate track.  
 
These groups will report on their work at the m onthly CoA SS meetings.  
 
This future programme of work will be reviewed in April 2019, and adjusted if necessary for the period 
from May to end of July 2019.  This ends my report.  
 
2. Council for  Trade in Services – Special Session  
Thank you, DG. Since my las t report to the TNC, I convened an informal meeting of the Special Session 
of the Council for Trade in Services on 13 November.   
 
The purpose of that meeting was for me to report on the consultations that I undertook in relation to 
the proposal by some Me mbers for exploratory discussions on market access.  
 
The proposal suggests that delegations exchange views on their current market access interests, 
against the background of recent economic and policy developments, and without prejudice to 
negotiations.  
 
DG, I have previously circulated (in JOB/SERV/285) a written copy of the oral report that I delivered 
on 13 November.  Let me therefore simply highlight my main observations:    
 
- A number of Members appear to have appetite for exploratory discussions that take place 
incrementally over different meetings.  Interest was expressed in discussing and making 
contributions in a broad number of sectors, and across different modes of supply.   
 
- At the same time, it is also clear that other Members, for different reasons, have reservations 
about engaging in exploratory discussions.  Both these general views were also expressed 
during our last informal meeting.  
 
- In terms of the way forward, I think that all understand that any Member can make proposals 
or provide vi ews in the context of the mandate under Article XIX.  This does not prejudge any 
particular outcome or broader agreement by Members.  I encouraged delegations to kick -start 
discussions by submitting a first paper on a sector or negotiating issue of their c hoosing.  I 
would then convene a meeting so that the paper can be discussed.  
 
Finally, with regard to Domestic Regulation, the Working Party held its first meeting of 2018 on 5 
December to discuss a proposal for disciplines on domestic regulation for Mode 4 that had been 
submitted by the delegation of India.  Further follow -up discussion on the proposal is expected to take 
place next year.  In addition, since my last report to the TNC, a group of Members has continued to 
hold open -ended meetings to  work on text of disciplines. This concludes my report. Thank you for 
your attention.   
 
3. Committee on Development – Special Session  
Members will recall that in my last report to the informal TNC/HODs in October 2018, I reported on 
the consultations that I had been holding with the G90 Coordinators (the ACP, the African Group and 
the LDC Coordinators) in my efforts to seek clarity on the way forward. In that report I had informed 
Members that my consultations were still in a preliminary stage and that I would be hold ing further 
consultations with the proponents.  
 
Accordingly, I had invited the three Coordinators for another round of consultations on 12 November 
2018. During these consultations I was informed that the G90 was actively looking at ways to restart 
discuss ions and to take forward the work in the CTD SS.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 57 - 
 
  In the meantime, I continue to urge all Members to redouble efforts to ensure constructive 
engagement when the CTD SS should resume work. The Chair remains available to facilitate an y 
consultations to this effect. This concludes my report.  
 
4. Negotiating Group on Rules  
Thank you, Chair. I would like to provide an update on the work of the Negotiating Group on Rules 
since my last report to the Heads of Delegation and Trade Negotiations Committee, in October.  
  
At that time, the Negotiating Group was in the middle of its last cluster of fisheries subsidies meetings 
of this year, in accordance with its agreed work programme for September through December. And 
we have just finished this last meeting cluster last Fr iday. As I reported in October, one element of 
the September to December work programme was brainstorming discussions undertaken in four 
Incubator Groups. These Groups were small, and were composed with a view to representativity. Each 
was assigned a serie s of different issues that have arisen in the negotiations, on which they were 
asked to develop if they could ideas and approaches that might help to bridge gaps, which remain 
both substantial and numerous. To ensure inclusiveness and transparency, the Inc ubator Groups 
brainstormed both internally and with visiting delegations. They then reported back to the plenary, 
without filtration or judgement, all issues and ideas that had been generated and discussed. Because 
of the brainstorming nature of the work, the ideas generated were not attributed to particular 
delegations, and they were without prejudice to the position of any Member. The goal of the Incubator 
Group process was to stimulate some out -of-the-box thinking that might provide useful inputs to any 
delegation, and to the Negotiating Group as a whole, in our collective work toward a compromise 
outcome by the end of next year.  
 
The activities at each of the three meeting clusters, in September, November, and December, included 
first, the Incubator Gro up work; second, technical sessions with presentations and experience -sharing 
by Members’ own fisheries experts, and by the FAO; third, text -based discussions based on the 
negotiating documents created in the lead -up to MC11; and fourth, completion of the technical 
streamlining of those documents.  
 
The experience with the Incubator Groups was positive. Each of these Groups produced a report during 
each meeting cluster recapping the ideas it had generated and the issues and considerations it had 
discussed. Many Members indicated that they saw a lot of useful ideas reflected in the reports, and at 
the request of the Negotiating Group, the Secretariat is compiling the ideas and issues developed and 
considered during the entire Incubator Group, for the future r eference of delegations.  
 
Regarding what comes next, as I had foreshadowed in my last report, in November I held consultations 
with interested delegations concerning how best to organize the fisheries subsidies work during the 
first half of 2019. Here, se veral themes emerged strongly: first, that as of early next year the 
Negotiating Group needs to shift into full negotiating mode; second, that in so doing, the process 
needs be more flexible and more Member -driven than during 2018; third, that the work nee ds to 
include substantial time to work in less -than-plenary formats, both Member -organized and Chair - or 
facilitator -led; and fourth, that the goal of the technical work in early 2019 should be to prepare a 
basis on which Ambassadors can begin to engage me aningfully as early in the year as possible, and 
in any case before the summer break.  
 
I am happy to report that last Friday the Negotiating Group agreed on its work programme for January -
July 2019. The Group will hold one -week meeting clusters in January, February, March, May, June, 
and July. Each cluster will involve time for bilateral and  other Member organized meetings, and for 
open-ended consultations on the main areas for proposed disciplines, namely subsidies to illegal, 
unreported and unregulated fishing; subsidies in relation to overfished stocks; and subsidies 
contributing to overca pacity and overfishing; as well as on the cross -cutting issues of special and 
differential treatment, dispute settlement, institutional issues, and notification and transparency. On 
the last set of issues, I should emphasize that these issues also would be  taken up in an integrated 
manner in the context of the three areas proposed for disciplines.  
 
A further element of the work programme is the appointment of four facilitators, one for each of the 
four areas I have just referred to. The facilitators will a ssist delegations in their Member organized 
activities as requested, and will provide other appropriate assistance to the Chair and the Negotiating 
Group. I have asked Members to submit nominations for the facilitator positions and will be selecting 
the fo ur facilitators from among those nominees.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 58 - 
 
  In discussing this ambitious programme of work for 2019, some delegations returned to a point that 
had been raised earlier this year, namely a request for financial support to bring capital -based officials 
to Gen eva for the negotiating sessions. I have been encouraging delegations raising this issue to reach 
out to potential donors, given that the Secretariat itself cannot provide this sort of assistance.  
 
As the final element of this year’s work on fisheries sub sidies, I have invited Heads of Delegation to a 
meeting this Friday morning, 14 December. At that meeting, I will provide further details on the work 
of the Negotiating Group during the fall, and will brief Heads of Delegation on the new work programme 
and on how I envisage them increasing their substantive engagement in the fisheries subsidies work 
over the course of next year.  
 
When the fisheries subsidies work resumes in early 2019, the key ingredient that we will need, to 
meet the end -of-year deadline to reach a final outcome, is the full engagement of all delegations, in 
a genuine consensus -building mode. For this, the support of Heads of Delegation is crucial – both so 
that their technical colleagues can engage in this manner as from January, and in t he later stages 
when the Heads of Delegation themselves are fully engaged on the substance. I am counting on all of 
my Head of Delegation colleagues in this regard.  
 
Finally, as is evident from this and my previous reports to the Trade Negotiations Committ ee, the work 
in the Negotiating Group on Rules during 2018 was has focused exclusively on fisheries subsidies. 
That said, the necessary space would be made available to consider any other elements in the rules 
agenda that might be raised.  
 
This concludes my report. I look forward to continuing to brief the Heads of Delegation and the Trade 
Negotiations Committee at future meetings of this sort.  
 
5. Dispute Settlement Body – Special Session  
 
• Ongoing work  
 
The DSB in Special Session held an informal open -ended meeting on 20 November 2018. The meeting 
concluded focused work on Remand, which was based on two distinct proposals, one from Korea, the 
other from seven Members. Both proposals seek the introduction of a right of each disputing party to 
request that a re mand panel make specific additional findings on claims or defences in respect of 
which the Appellate Body could not complete the analysis. Before the meeting, I circulated, under my 
own responsibility, a Chair's document, which recorded the state of the di scussions on this issue and 
identified aspects of the proposals that could benefit from further work by the group. Members that 
spoke, including the proponents, expressed appreciation for the Chair's assessment and indicated that 
it accurately reflected th e state of the discussion on this issue. With this, the group concluded work 
on 8 of the 12 issues under negotiation.  
 
Unrelatedly, Members commented on a statement at a previous meeting by four Members, on 
organizing the group's upcoming focused work on the remaining issues in a manner that would achieve 
additional time and efficiency gains. Among the Members that spoke, some expressed a preference 
for keeping the current pace of meetings, while others supported the statement by the four Members 
and favoured adjusting the work schedule in a way that would realize time and efficiency gains. Those 
that saw no immediate need for an adjustment nevertheless indicated that they could be flexible. I 
will take into account the views expressed by Members in planning for the work ahead.  
 
• Upcoming work  
Following consultations with Members, I have decided not to hold any meeting in De cember. I intend 
to inform Members of the date of the next meeting soon.  
 
_______________  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 59 - 
 
   
ANNEX 2  
STATEMENTS BY MEMBER S AT THE INFORMAL TN C AND INFORMAL HODS MEETING S HELD 
ON 10 DECEM BER 2018  
Following the Director -General's statement  at the above -mentioned meeting, the statements made by  
Canada; Central African Republic (LDCs); Iceland (Trade Impact Working Group); Singapore (ASEAN); 
Colombia (Structured Discussions on Investment Facilitation for Development); South Africa (African 
Group); Australia (Joint Statement Initiative on E -Commerce); Vanuatu (ACP); European Union; 
Uruguay (Informal Working Group on MSMEs); China; Benin (C -4); Panama (Article XII Members); 
Switzerland; Brazil; Sri Lanka; Angola; Russian Federation; Republic of Korea; Mexico; Japan; 
Indonesia (G -33); India; Argentina; Chinese Taipei; Uganda; Philippines; Jamaica; Senegal; Norway; 
Chile; Turkey; Peru; Kenya; Hong Kong, China; Nigeria; Cambodia; Thailand; Costa Rica; Pakistan; 
Trinidad and Tobago; Viet Nam; Haiti ( CARICOM); Papua New Guinea (Pacific Group); St. Lucia (OECS) 
and Dominican Republic are included below as part of the Minutes of the General Council meeting . 
 
_______________  
 
1. Canada  
 
At our last meeting, I conveyed Canada's concerns with the numerous chal lenges the WTO faces to 
ensure that the organization remains relevant for all of us. As this year is coming to an end, allow me 
to reflect on these once more.  
 
As much as Canada welcomes the recent discussions and proposals from certain WTO Members, which 
does demonstrate that more and more of them are indeed reflecting on the path ahead for the 
organization, we must remain mindful of the challenges ahead.  
 
Canada continues to encourage all Members to take action to strengthen and modernise this 
organization, in a pragmatic manner, while being as inclusive as possible to reflect all perspectives on 
the improvement of global trade rules. After all, no one benefits from an absent or incomplete 
international trading system.  
 
I would like to briefly f ollow up on my comments at the last TNC, in which I explained what Canada 
envisioned as next steps on WTO reform. Since then, Canada's Minister of International Trade 
Diversification, Jim Carr, hosted a meeting in Ottawa in late October of a small group of  Ministers 
committed to the multilateral trading system. The focus of the meeting was to begin work on 
identifying concrete and tangible ways the operation and functioning of the WTO could be enhanced 
and improved over the short, medium and long terms.  
 
A joint communiqué was issued following the meeting, providing clear guidance to officials on next 
steps. This was circulated to all WTO Members in document WT/L/1042. One of the guiding principles 
of our work is that our efforts must be coherent and consis tent with the efforts of other Members on 
modernising and enhancing the WTO.  
 
As a first step, therefore, Members of the small group are currently engaged in discussions on ways 
of strengthening the deliberative function of the WTO in the short term – work that is supportive and 
coherent with efforts by other Members on improving compliance with notification obligations. To 
support the group's work, Canada has drafted a discussion paper on strengthening the deliberative 
functions of the WTO which we will s hortly circulate to the Membership.  
 
Looking ahead, Ministers of the small group will reconvene on the margins of Davos at the end of 
January to take stock of the work of officials and to provide additional guidance as necessary. We 
remain committed to pro ceeding in a transparent and open manner and welcome the views of all WTO 
Members on our discussion paper. We remain equally committed to broadening the discussions at the 
earliest possible time.  
 
I also want to report that I have reported on this initiati ve and the Ottawa meeting to the informal 
group of developing countries, the Commonwealth members of the WTO, the LDC group, and the 
South -South dialogue last Friday.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 60 - 
 
  While we continue to examine these broader questions, Canada remains committed to pursu e the 
work to advance the WTO's negotiating agenda on all issues of interest to the Membership, notably 
on core issues in agriculture and fisheries subsidies, as well as in areas covered by joint statement 
initiatives such as e -commerce, investment facilit ation and trade and gender.  
 
With regard to the agriculture negotiations, Canada's primary objective continues to be to develop 
new rules in the agriculture negotiations that reflect current realities in international agriculture trade.  
Our priority rema ins developing stronger disciplines on trade and production distorting domestic 
support.   
 
To help advance discussions in this area, in September Canada presented a factual analysis which 
provides an overview of how domestic support has evolved since 2001 . In November, Canada, along 
with co -sponsors, circulated an analytical paper which looks at the use of product specific support as 
notified by Members.   
 
Canada also believes Members can take concrete steps to further strengthen disciplines in the export  
competition pillar and recently made a presentation to the Special Session looking at areas where 
further work can be undertaken, in particular on export financing, state trading enterprises, and 
international food aid. The objective with these presentati ons and papers has been to start technical 
discussions on these issues and the current challenges in international agriculture trade.  
 
To that end, we welcome the Chair of CoA -SS' plan to establish working groups in the agriculture 
negotiations, in order t o enable Members to dive deeper into technical discussions, with a view to 
developing options for outcomes at MC12 in 2020. In these groups, Canada intends to continue to 
play a constructive role by making technical submissions to advance our collective di scussions.  
 
In our view, if we are to make progress in agriculture, technical "without prejudice" discussions are 
needed to develop realistic options which results in outcomes that are balanced, and with contributions 
from all the key players.  
 
On the fi sheries subsidies negotiations, Canada is broadly supportive of the work programme that has 
been established for the first half of next year. We hope that Members' preference to shift to bilateral 
and open -ended consultations will act as a further catalyst  for advancing negotiations in order to 
achieve a comprehensive and effective agreement in 2019.  
 
We would also like to express our thanks to Kenya for having organised the first global conference on 
the Sustainable Blue Economy in Nairobi on 26 -28 Novemb er. The Conference was co -hosted by 
Kenya, Canada and Japan and co -sponsored by several other Members of the WTO —Portugal, Norway, 
Fiji, Portugal, the United Kingdom, China, the European Union, Nigeria, Ireland, South Africa and Qatar 
— as well as by Sudan  and several other organizations. This was a highly attended event, as I 
understand that there were more than 12,000 participants.  
 
Canada organised a panel discussion on "Reaching an Agreement at the WTO on Disciplines for 
Fisheries Subsidies", for which  we were grateful to have both the Chair of the Rules Negotiating Group, 
Mexican Ambassador Roberto Zapata, and Ambassador to the Pacific Islands Forum, Mere Falemaka, 
as panellists, among several other experts. The panel discussion was delivered to a room  at capacity, 
with more than 200 attendees, helping, we hope, to draw even greater international attention to the 
urgency of delivering on SDG 14.6, and contribute to the momentum needed for an agreement by 
December 2019.  
 
Canada remains encouraged that the joint statement initiatives launched at MC11 remain high on the 
agenda for many Members. We have seen multiple fruitful discussions and meetings on the JSIs, 
especially when it comes to e -commerce, services domestic regul ation, investment facilitation, MSMEs, 
and women's economic empowerment, in the last year, and looking back, the amount of work that 
has been accomplished in just under one year is quite impressive.  
 
For example, Canada is pleased with the progress made i n the exploratory discussions of the Joint 
Statement Initiative on e -commerce and with the increased engagement we noticed in recent 
meetings.  
 
We continue to encourage all Members to seize this opportunity to inform the discussions by 
participating in th e initiative. Canada is looking forward to the December stock -taking and to move WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 61 - 
 
  the discussion to the next phase with other participating Members. Maintaining momentum remains 
important. Canada also welcomes the recent constructive discussions under the W TO Work Programme 
on Electronic Commerce related to the moratorium on custom duties on electronic transmissions.  
  
Investment facilitation is another great example. Canada took part in the multiple structured 
discussions on investment facilitation this yea r and very much intends to continue to engage positively 
on these, as we consider they are instrumental in ensuring our trade policies are not only relevant to 
today's global economy, but deliver inclusive results for all stakeholders.  
 
Finally, Canada de eply regrets that we remain unable to launch a selection process to appoint new 
Appellate Body members. The dispute settlement system remains a central pillar of the WTO and the 
serious effect of the current four vacancies on the Appellate Body cannot be u nderstated. Once again, 
Canada urges the United States to join, without delay, a consensus to launch a selection process so 
as to ensure the continued functioning of the Appellate Body.  
 
Canada also stands ready to constructively participate in solution -oriented discussions on other 
initiatives underway to address concerns raised by Members regarding the functioning of the dispute 
settlement system.  
 
2. Central African Republic (LDCs)  
 
I take the floor on behalf of the LDC Group and I thank the Director -Gener al for convening this Trade 
Negotiations Committee meeting. We would like this statement to be recorded under the relevant item 
of the General Council agenda.  
 
The LDC Group wish to express its appreciation for the Director -General's report on the current 
situation regarding trade negotiations in the WTO. Also, we thank the different Negotiating Committees 
Chairs for their reports on the trade -related issues they follow.  
 
At the end of this year, 2018, the LDC Group wishes to point out that it has spared no  efforts in 
continuing to defend its interests – in view of a better integration into the world trading system – 
through the negotiations led within the WTO.  
  
Our group will continue to pursue its efforts, in collaboration with all Members, in order to re ach 
provisions that allow LDCs to secure a growing share of international trade – corresponding to their 
economic development needs – in line with the Marrakesh Agreement principles that established the 
WTO.  
 
The LDC Group made several submissions during t his year in an attempt to fulfil our development 
objectives. These submissions follow the guidelines given by our LDC Trade Ministers, as part of their 
recent Ministerial Declaration adopted in Buenos Aires.  
 
Our submissions referred notably to the Articl e 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement and the operationalization 
of technology transfer incentives in favour of LDCs, with an illustrative list approach, which would 
satisfy all Members.  
 
There was also the issue regarding LDCs graduation and the need to ensure a  smooth transition to 
economic development and integration into world trade. LDCs have submitted a proposal for correcting 
a technical oversight related to the Annex VII of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing 
Measures to enable graduating LDCs – as is the case for certain non -LDCs designated in paragraph b 
of Annex VII of the SCM Agreement – to continue to benefit from the flexibilities of Article 27.2 of the 
SCM Agreement, as long as the Gross National Income per capita does not exceed US $ 1000 (in 
constant 1990 dollars), and if the graduated LDC finds itself below this threshold during three 
consecutive years. This treatment was precisely granted to non -LDCs in paragraph b of Annex VII, 
agreed in the Doha Implementation Issues Decision in 2001. All LDCs are benefiting under paragraph 
a. However, it must be made clear that LDCs that graduate should have the benefits of paragraph b 
developing countries, if they fall under USD 1,000.  
 
Our group has also communicated on the issue of rules of origin, requesting developed and developing 
country Members to highlight in their reports the actual measures taken to implement the Nairobi 
Decision. The information provided will also be of real relevance in assessing the impact of the 
requirements on LDC export ers' ability to effectively benefit from the preferences offered.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 62 - 
 
  The LDC Group also communicated on the operationalization of the Nairobi Ministerial Decision on 
services waiver to build awareness of LDC services providers of the milestones we achieved in  the 
submission of 24 notifications so far. Our group has put forward elements to allow the review of 
notified preferences that will help toward this end. It is essential for our better integration into 
multilateral trade that our services providers can fu lly concretise opportunities offered by the granting 
of preferences. An appropriate technical assistance and orientation to the notifications is therefore 
essential, as mentioned in paragraph 1.4 of the Nairobi Decision.  
 
In addition, LDCs continue to part icipate in text -based negotiations on fisheries subsides, further 
adapting its own text proposal that was submitted last year, now embedded in RD/TN/RL/29, 
TN/RL/W/274 that was cited by Ministers, and the latest texts streamlined in the Negotiating Group 
on Rules this year. Our text was among the proponent texts that helped drive the negotiations to 
Buenos Aires resulting in the turning point achieved in the consensus reflected in the Ministerial 
Decision on Fisheries Subsidies, mandating that we conclude n egotiations by next year. We have 
actively participated in the process and we are ready for the next phase in 2019.  
 
The LDC Group also insists that Members recognise that our inspiration in these negotiations is also 
grounded in the need for the developme nt of artisanal and subsistence fisheries and the sustainable 
exploitation of our fisheries resources, consistent with our rights and obligations under the 
international law of the sea and national law. We do not wish the WTO to supplant these rights and 
obligations but only to draw on what is there in order to design a rule to eliminate subsidies 
contributing to overfishing and over capacity as well as to prohibit subsidies to vessels and operators 
engaged in illegal fishing activities.  
 
We stress to all M embers the need to ensure the full operationalization of all the decisions taken so 
far in favour of LDCs. This of course includes the Hong Kong Decision on duty -free and quota -free 
market access. The LDC Group takes the opportunity to thank those Members that are already granting 
DFQF market access in compliance with the Decision and calls on other Members to do their utmost 
to implement the decision. It must be noted that the LDCs' market share in world trade is barely 1%. 
Thus, our countries clearly need  all the technical assistance possible – from Members and the WTO – 
to enable us to benefit concretely and significantly from the decisions taken.  
 
The state of our integration into world trade also suggests that the WTO and its Members should 
ensure that they provide all necessary and important flexibilities considered by LDCs – as part of the 
elaboration of trade rules. Thus, the Special and Differential Treatment must remain at the centre of 
proposals, Agreements and their implementation.  
 
With regard to  agriculture, the LDC Group continues to advocate the need for a permanent solution 
on public stockholding for food security purposes, in accordance with the Nairobi Decision, and in 
which LDCs would be able to develop food security programmes that do not yet exist.  
 
In addition, on domestic support, the LDC Group continues to insist on the importance of drastically 
reducing market -distorting domestic support and recalls the urgency to achieve the objective of 
eliminating the support of cotton production wh ich negatively impact the C -4 and cotton -producing 
LDCs – whose trade in this particular product is a vital economic activity from the perspective of 
contribution to the national wealth created and jobs creation.  
 
In addition, the establishment of a specia l safeguard mechanism is equally important for LDCs to 
protect fragile farmers living from subsistence agricultural production.  
 
In services domestic regulations, LDCs remind all proponents of the textual proposals sought by LDCs 
since 2008 until today. LD Cs have contributed to discussions in the Working Party on Domestic 
Regulations and will continue to do so based on consensus and flexibilities needed as well for 
graduating LDCs, should these negotiations advance.  
 
Lastly, with regard to recent discussio ns that have accelerated around the prospects for reform of the 
WTO. The LDC Group would like to point out that any reform of the WTO's functioning should take into 
account the development dimension and the necessity to defend an effective Special and Diff erential 
Treatment for LDCs – in order to take into account our institutional and infrastructural constraints, our 
difficulties in terms of human resources and financial capabilities, and the lack of technological 
endowment.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 63 - 
 
  The LDC Group also wishes to r ecall that multilateralism and inclusiveness must remain the basis of 
the WTO functioning. It is about preserving a rules -based multilateral trading system within which all 
countries can make their voices heard and achieve common results that support our s ustained growth 
and advancement. The preservation of the system requires a resolution as quickly as possible of the 
impasse over the selection of Appellate Body members and problems that the dispute settlement body 
is currently facing.  
 
On behalf of the LD C Group, I wish a positive and constructive future for the WTO, in the interest of 
all its Members and of multilateralism.  
 
3. Iceland (Trade Impact Working Group)  
 
A year has now passed since Ministers and Heads of Delegations of more than 120 Members and 
Observers launched the Joint Declaration on Trade and Women's Economic Empowerment, on the 
occasion of the Eleventh Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Buenos Aire s.  
 
The declaration is the fruit of the work of the Trade Impact Working Group, that was established under 
the auspices of the International Gender Champions Geneva, and that has been co -chaired by Sierra 
Leone, Iceland and the International Trade Centre.  After the departure of our good colleague, 
Ambassador Yvette Stevens, it is my pleasure to inform colleagues today that her excellency, Dr. 
Athaliah Molokomme, Ambassador of the Republic of Botswana, has accepted to take over from 
Ambassador Stevens and c o-chair the working group with myself and Ms. Arancha Gonzales, the 
Executive Director of the International Trade Centre.  
 
I want to use this opportunity to thank Ambassador Stevens for her dedication and important 
contribution to women's economic empower ment and trade. I also welcome Ambassador Molokomme's 
engagement and look forward to working with her on the important topic of trade and gender.  
 
I wanted also to use this last meeting before the end of the year to inform the Membership of the 
work undert aken in the previous twelve months following the adoption of the declaration and tell you 
about the work that lies ahead now that we start to prepare for the next Ministerial Conference in 
Kazakhstan in 2020.  
 
By launching the Joint Declaration on Trade an d Women's Economic Empowerment in Buenos Aires 
we put gender issues at the heart of the international trade agenda and signalled our commitment to 
empower women within the trade landscape. We also wanted to create a platform to talk about trade 
and women's  economic empowerment.  
 
We have over the last year seen an increased focus on the issue of gender and trade. The WTO 
organised, on International Women's Day, a conference entitled "What role for trade and the WTO in 
women’s economic empowerment?" and I wan t to thank the Director -General for his engagement on 
this topic. The participation of women in international trade and the economy has been taken up in 
many trade policy reviews, over the last twelve months, where Members have shared best practices. 
The findings will be collected and shared with Members to provide a better understanding of the issue.  
 
A series of seminars have been organised, under the Joint Declaration on Trade and Women's 
Economic Empowerment, in order to get a better understanding of t he barriers women face when it 
comes to trade.  
 
The following seminars have been held since Buenos Aires: the permanent delegation of Canada 
organised the first seminar in March on gender based analysis of trade policy. The Republic of Moldova 
then organi sed the second seminar on Gender and Public Procurement in June, along with the 
International Trade Centre, the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development and the WTO. In 
October the MIKTA countries, that is Mexico, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Turkey and Australia, 
organised a seminar to discuss the important topic of women in global value chains. Last week, the 
Netherlands, the WTO and the World Bank Group organised a conference on Closing the Gender Gaps.  
 
The series of seminars will continue next year, on topics such as financial inclusion, women and trade 
in trade agreements and women in digital trade. The working group has also launched a call for good 
practices in the field of trade and gender. We urge everyone that has useful experience or  good 
practice to share to respond to the call so that we can build on these important lessons for the design WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 64 - 
 
  of policy levers to advance economic opportunities for women. More work is also needed on data 
collection and Aid for Trade.  
 
Any Member wishing t o organise a seminar can be in touch with the Trade Impact Group and I also 
want to stress that for those Members that didn't join at the time, it is possible to join the group at 
any time.  
 
At the next Ministerial Conference in Kazakhstan, we will launch  a publication on making trade policy 
more inclusive that will collect the main findings and best practices that have been gather through the 
trade policy reviews, seminars, call for best practices and research undertaken, and report on the 
work of the Tra de Impact Group.  
 
We look forward to continued active engagement with the Membership on this important issue in the 
year to come. We thank you for your support.  
 
4. Singapore (ASEAN)  
 
ASEAN is concerned with the increase in unilateral trade actions and protectionist sentiments globally. 
They put pressure on and threaten to undermine the rules -based multilateral trading system, which 
underpins the growth and prosperity of our region. We reaffirm our strong commitment to 
multilateralism and international cooperation, and remain steadfast in upholding the open and rules -
based multilateral trading system.  ASEAN members share the resolve to keep markets open, inclusive 
and competitive. In th is context, we welcome the substantial progress made in the Regional 
Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) negotiations in 2018 and the determination to conclude 
RCEP in 2019.  
 
ASEAN supports efforts to improve the functioning of the WTO and will cont ribute to make the WTO 
more relevant and adaptive to a changing world, and to strengthen its effectiveness. We welcome 
continued discussion on issues relating to e -commerce in the WTO, which will promote the 
development of the digital economy and trade. Th e Ministerial Decision on Fisheries Subsidies adopted 
at Buenos Aires gives clear direction for our work on fisheries subsidies negotiations. We are 
committed to engaging constructively in these negotiations for a multilateral agreement on fisheries 
subsid ies to be adopted in line with the MC11 decision.   
 
ASEAN reiterates our systemic concerns with the lengthy delays in launching the Appellate Body 
selection process. We urge that utmost flexibility be shown so that Members can adopt a DSB decision 
to laun ch the Appellate Body selection process expeditiously. Concerns have been raised on the 
functioning of the dispute settlement mechanism and various proposals have been put forth by several 
Members for the agenda of the forthcoming General Council meeting. ASEAN welcomes the tabling of 
these and any other proposals by Members. ASEAN will participate constructively in any discussions 
aimed at finding a solution to end the impasse.   
 
5. Singapore  
 
As this is the last informal TNC and HoDs meeting for 2018, it is  timely to take stock of our work this 
year. Some progress has been made and we should continue to build on such efforts. The regular 
committees have continued to do good work, such as the TBT Committee's Eighth Triennial Review 
and the discussions aimed a t improving transparency and compliance with notification obligations.  
The creative approaches which have been tried in some areas have helped deepen engagement on 
the issues, such as the clusters for fisheries subsidies and the first Agriculture Policy L andscape 
Symposium. The various Joint Statement Initiatives, including on e -commerce, investment facilitation, 
domestic regulation, and MSMEs, have also made substantial progress and are now looking at the 
agendas for the next year.  
 
The WTO is facing unp recedented challenges that strain the system dangerously. The Appellate Body 
is at serious risk of existing only in name by December 2019 if the selection impasse remains. Security 
exceptions have been invoked in numerous recent disputes. The WTO's recent report on G20 trade 
measures showed that the new import -restrictive measures hit a new high, and is more than six times 
larger than that recorded in the previous reporting period. Trade growth in the coming months is 
expected to be below trend. As the Dire ctor-General has said in an interview with the BBC, "This is WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 65 - 
 
  the moment when some very basic principles of the organization, principles of cooperation, principles 
of non -discrimination are being challenged and put into question."1 
 
Singapore is concerned a bout the critical challenges facing the rules -based multilateral trading system.  
All Members, especially the small and medium -sized, will be negatively affected if trade conflicts spill 
over into wider tensions and disrupt global trade. We recogni ze that merely raising concerns in itself 
does not solve the problem. Therefore, we have been contributing to efforts to reform the WTO, 
including through the Joint Communiqué of the Ottawa Ministerial on WTO Reform as well as our co -
sponsorship of various papers related to the dispute settlement, which will be discussed at the General 
Council on Wednesday. Singapore is also ready to move into the next phase of work towards WTO 
negotiations under the Joint Statement Initiative on E -Commerce. Updating our rulebook t o take due 
account of the e -commerce reality will send positive signals to our stakeholders on the WTO's 
continued relevance.   
 
We will also continue to participate actively in discussions on emerging issues as well as core areas, 
including development, a griculture and rules. In this context, we look forward to engaging in the CoA 
SS working groups to intensify discussions on various agriculture topics, which will be open to all 
Members. Singapore supports the shift to a more focused negotiating mode next year in the fisheries 
subsidies negotiations as it is necessary for delivering an outcome by 2019.   
 
As we move into the new year, it is essential that Members demonstrate the political will and collective 
action that is crucial to improving the WTO and r esolving trade tensions. It is also important that 
discussions on WTO reform are transparent and inclusive to garner the buy -in from the wider 
Membership.  
 
6. Colombia (Structured Discussions on Investment Facilitation for Development)  
 
In line with the open,  transparent and inclusive nature of the Joint Initiative on Investment Facilitation 
for Development, I am pleased to update Members on the latest progress made.  
 
Since my last report at the HODs in October, we have held three meetings, with the most recent one 
organised only a few days ago, on 6 December. The meeting held last week focused on stock -taking 
and next steps – highlighting the substantial progress made in the initiative so far, as well as the work 
that lies ahead of us in 2019. To help focus the discussions, an Informal Note on Stock -taking and 
Next Steps was circulated under my responsibility beforehand, based on my extensive consultations 
with delegati ons. Let me please share with you a few takeaways derived from the stock -take and next 
steps meeting.  
 
Stock -taking  
 
First, last week Members took stock of the seven meetings we have held this year, including the 
organizational one. These meetings have be en well -attended including by many non -signatories of the 
Joint Ministerial Statement. Meetings have been thematically -organised and benefitted from guiding 
questions, background Non -Papers, presentations from capital -based experts and from international 
organizations. All documents are circulated to all Members and are available on the Members' section 
of the WTO website.  
 
Second, the goal of the structured discussions as established in the Joint Ministerial Statement is clear: 
to identify and develop ele ments of a multilateral framework on investment facilitation for 
development. Members agreed that the thematic -based discussions organised in 2018 had been 
successful in fulfilling the first part of that goal, namely to "identify" the possible elements of a 
multilateral framework. Members highlighted the usefulness of reflecting their input in the "Checklist 
of Issues Raised by Members" as prepared under my responsibility. As reported to you previously, the 
Checklist is a tool that reflects and organises in  a neutral and coherent manner the identified elements 
of the framework. The content, structure, and wording of the checklist do not in any way prejudge the 
position of any Member in these discussions.  
 
Third, development has always been at the core of thi s initiative. In October, a full session was devoted 
to specifically addressing the very important theme of facilitating the greater participation of 
developing and least -developed country Members in global investment flows. The discussions greatly 
                                                
1 www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/business -46395379 .  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 66 - 
 
  benefit ted from the informative presentations of capital -based experts from national investment 
authorities, as well as by experts from international organizations. In addition, an inter -sessional 
meeting on 16 November was held to better understand and further d eepen the discussions on single 
window type of mechanisms.  
 
Next steps  
 
Fourth, for the upcoming work in 2019, there was broad agreement amongst Members to start 
focusing on "developing" the identified elements of the framework using the checklist as a ref erence 
point. Therefore, based on participating Members' feedback, this next phase of the Structured 
Discussions in 2019 will be based on concrete examples, including text -based examples or 
suggestions.  
 
In light of participating Members' endorsement of th e proposed way forward, I will shortly circulate a 
tentative schedule of meetings for the first part of 2019 (from January to July), which will include an 
organizational meeting to be held in late January. Building on the checklist, the tentative schedule will 
include the elements to be addressed at each meeting.  
 
Last and most importantly, as emphasised last week by Members, the initiative will continue to be 
transparent, inclusive, and open to all Members. As stipulated in the Joint Ministerial Statement , the 
discussions do not address market access, investment protection, and investor -state dispute 
settlement. Participation in these structured discussions will continue to be without prejudice to 
Members' positions on any of the topics under consideration .  
 
To conclude, let me reaffirm my commitment as Coordinator to keep the process open, transparent 
and inclusive. I hope to engage with all of you to better understand your views and possible concerns, 
and reiterate my invitation to all Members to get inv olved and help co -shape the next phase of this 
initiative in 2019.  
 
7. Colombia  
 
I would now like to speak on behalf of my country. Firstly, we thank the Director -General and the 
Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their reports.  
 
Colombia appears at this m eeting reiterating the call to safeguard the principles and rules of the 
multilateral trading system. We are still facing a situation that poses challenges and difficulties for the 
delicate balance of the institutional architecture of world trade. However,  the emergence of specific 
initiatives and proposals that seek to address some of these problems and generate a dialogue which 
might lead to their resolution is, in our view, a positive development.  
 
Colombia welcomes these proposals and any others that ma y follow. We think they represent an 
important step towards resolving the deadlock which we have been experiencing. Accordingly, we 
stand ready to discuss the proposals in a constructive manner, and in the appropriate settings, with 
all Members of the orga nization.  
 
We wish to reiterate once again that this is a Member -driven Organization, and therefore it is our task 
to protect and strengthen the system. Colombia is convinced of the need to address these challenges 
through a frank and constructive dialogue  that ensures the continuity and steady improvement of this 
key global public good.  
 
8. South Africa (African Group)  
 
I make this statement on behalf of the African Group. As you may be aware, African Union Ministers 
of Trade are meeting in Cairo this week, a nd the Coordinator of the African Group, Ambassador Carim, 
is representing our Group at that engagement.    
 
We thank the Director -General for his report on his recent activities and in respect to his views on the 
way forward. We also thank the Chairs of t he Negotiating Groups for their updates. We can be brief 
and focus on the way forward.  
 
Our Group will continue to pursue outcomes on the core developmental issues in line with the Doha 
mandate, notably in respect to agricultural domestic support, cotton, public stockholding and fishery WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 67 - 
 
  subsidies. We have made specific comments on the Chair's proposed CoA SS Work Programme, 
essentially to underscore the importance of respecting previous Ministerial Decisions as well as to 
ensure that the pace and structure of the work next year takes into account the challenges faced by 
smaller delegations.  
 
The African Group will also continue to seek an outcome on our joint G -90 SDT proposals. We have 
advanced some ideas to restart a dialogue and in general we have receive d encouraging feedback. 
We hope all Members will be prepared to consider our efforts in a positive light and agree to a re -start 
of a dialogue.  
 
We need to register the growing frustration in our Group of the opposition to advancing on issues of 
longstand ing interest to us. As we consider the way forward, the issues we raise are critical 
components of our work, and how they are treated will have a bearing on other matters under 
consideration.  
 
Bearing in mind that most members of our Group are least -devel oped countries, the African Group 
again urges all WTO Members to implement all the Decisions in favour of LDCs in order to help them 
integrate more fully and sustainably into the multilateral trading system. We also reiterate our call 
that Members desist f rom making requests on African acceding countries that are incompatible with 
their level of development and capacity, and that these countries receive technical support before, 
during and after their accession.  
 
The African Group welcomes the news that Me mbers may have avoided what appeared to be an 
imminent escalation in unilateral measures. This, in our view, confirms the importance of continued 
dialogue and the need to respect the rules and principles underpinning the WTO. These are essential 
prerequisi tes for a constructive discussion on the range of issues that will be taken up in the WTO next 
year. 
 
African Group members are not major users of the dispute settlement mechanism but we recognise 
the importance of a properly functioning enforcement mechan ism to the WTO. In our view, the key 
priority for the WTO next year will be to resolve the impasse in the Appellate Body selection process 
and to prevent a situation where the system is disabled. We repeat our view that unless and until 
Members address thi s core issue, not only existing rules but also any discussion of new WTO rules or 
reform will be redundant. The new proposals that will be taken up at the General Council this week 
should, at a minimum, mark the beginning of a systematic engagement to reso lve concerns that have 
been raised. All Members should be fully engaged to find solutions.  
 
The Group is continuing to assess the recent papers on future of the WTO. Our Ministers will consider 
the issues later this week in Cairo. Without prejudging that discussion, we make the following 
observations.  
 
Thus far, the papers advance the views only of a select group of Members. They do not represent the 
views of a large number of delegations both in respect to a diagnosis of the problems or proposed 
solution s. Already, the proposals on transparency and notification and on changes to scope and 
application of SDT have encountered strong opposition. We should also expect that proposals could 
provoke counter -proposals. The chances of convergence seem unlikely at this stage.  
 
It is inevitable that if discussions were to proceed, all Members' views and interests need to be 
accommodated. The African Group will not support any dilution of our core developmental negotiating 
mandates and objectives and we will continue  to reiterate the importance of abiding by the principles 
and procedures established in the Marrakesh Agreement, including with respect to decision -making 
by consensus and on special and differential treatment.  
 
WTO issues are one of the items at the AU Ministerial meeting in Cairo this week. The second concerns 
the African continental free trade area. The AfCFTA is aimed at advancing the integration of African 
economies in order to promote intra -African trade and regional value chains. It is also part of  a wider 
set of objectives for structural transformation, industrial upgrading and economic diversification in 
Africa. We expect that WTO Members should support these efforts, and that the WTO should similarly 
be supportive but at a minimum, not undermine or complicate those efforts.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 68 - 
 
  9. Australia (Joint Statement Initiative on E -Commerce)  
 
I will first provide a brief report on progress in the E -Commerce Joint Statement initiative on behalf of 
the co -conveners (Australia, Japan and Singapore).  
 
At the end of November, we held the eighth exploratory discussion meeting. Our talks have been 
organised under four broad headings (1) enabling digital trade/e -commerce, (2) openness, (3) trust 
and (4) cross -cutting issues including development, transparency and coopera tion. At the November 
meeting, we explored in depth issues relating to customs duties electronic transmission, access and 
non-discrimination, intellectual property, cooperation and structural issues.  
 
We have scheduled a stocktake session for 18 December t o consider the next steps in the initiative.  
Leading up to this stocktake session, together with my two co -conveners, I have held two rounds of 
consultations, open to all WTO Members, to hear views and we are looking forward to a good exchange 
at our meet ing next week.  
 
Since the initiative was launched at MC11, there have been 17 formal written submissions and 
numerous room documents and presentations. Around 114 WTO Members have attended one or more 
meetings, including 43 Members that did not sign on to the Joint Statement at MC11. Meetings have 
been attended by developed and developing countries, including LDCs, from all major regions.  
 
Throughout, the joint statement initiative has remained open to all WTO Members that share the 
objective of conducting exploratory work toward future WTO negotiations on the trade -related aspects 
of electronic commerce. Work under the initiative has been inclusive, transparent and Member -driven. 
All documents related to this initiative, including submissions, presentations  and meeting reports, are 
available to all WTO Members online and I refer Members to these reports for further information.  
 
10. Australia  
 
In October this year, Australia was one of 13 Members to issue a Joint Communiqué at the Ottawa 
Ministerial meeting.  In  that communiqué, we confirmed our "common resolve for rapid and concerted 
action to address the unprecedented challenges" facing the multilateral trading system.  
 
G20 Leaders made a similar call to action only a few weeks ago, recognising that the multila teral 
trading system "is currently falling short of its objectives and there is room for improvement". To this 
end, G20 Leaders stated their support for "the necessary reform of the WTO to improve its 
functioning."  
 
Recognising the problem and the need for  reform is only the first step. It is now time to move to 
solution -focused action.  
 
First, it is clear that in order to have a well -functioning WTO, we need a strong, fully effective, dispute 
settlement system. We are deeply concerned about the ongoing App ellate Body impasse and are 
committed to work, as a priority, to unlock the appointments process. We recognise the need for 
improvements to the dispute settlement system and hope that proposals now circulated by WTO 
Members, two of which we have co -sponsor ed, will move forward urgently needed discussions. We 
ask all Members to join us and engage in good faith in this important effort.  
 
Second, we need to improve the WTO's monitoring and transparency functions. To this end, Australia 
joined the United States, the European Union, Japan, Costa Rica, Argentina and Chinese Taipei in co -
sponsoring the proposal on "Procedures to Enhance Transparency and Strengthen Notification 
Requirements under WTO Agreements". Effective notifications are essential for the s mooth operation 
of the multilateral trading system and to inform our negotiations. We need to encourage, assist and 
support Members to improve their level of compliance.  
 
Third, there is a strong need for timely and pragmatic action to ensure the WTO rules  remain relevant 
and reflect contemporary trading practices, including looking at those related to the causes of current 
tensions. Not to do so could lead to a further escalation in tensions.  
 
To allow constructive engagement on issues of interest to Membe rs and to modernise the WTO, 
Australia joined the Joint Statement Initiatives on e -commerce, services domestic regulation, 
investment facilitation and MSMEs.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 69 - 
 
  Exploratory work under the E -Commerce Joint Statement Initiative has made good progress. We now 
have a clearer idea of the unique opportunities and challenges that WTO Members face when engaging 
in this critical aspect of international trade. We are encouraged by the strong sense of momentum and 
share the goal of moving the initiative toward WTO negoti ations.  
 
Australia is also pleased with the good progress made this year in the open -ended discussions on 
Services Domestic Regulation and we remain committed to concluding a multilateral outcome in 
advance of the next Ministerial Conference.  
 
We also welc ome progress in Investment Facilitation, MSMEs and gender, and look forward to actively 
participating in these initiatives as they move forward in 2019.  
 
While Australia is committed to the ongoing work on the Joint Statement Initiatives, we fully recognis e 
the importance of continuing our hard work on important outstanding negotiations, such as agriculture 
and fisheries subsidies, recogni zing the significance of these issues to many Members, including 
Australia.  
 
We welcome an increased level of activity i n the agriculture negotiations, but we need to find a way 
to bridge differences and move beyond entrenched positions. Cairns Group members have worked 
hard in 2018 to provide the analysis needed to help us identify solutions to today's problems in 
agricult ural trade.  
 
It is clear that addressing the high levels of global trade distorting domestic support remains a priority 
for Members. This is a common problem for us all, and deserves a common solution. We look forward 
to moving into the next phase of negot iations to promote agricultural reform in the coming year.  
 
Australia also looks forward to moving to intensified text -based negotiations on fisheries subsidies and 
support the Chair's efforts to establish a more intensive negotiating dynamic. One year has  now 
elapsed since MC11 when our Ministers agreed to conclude these negotiations by end 2019. We have 
only 12 months left. We must all maintain a sense of urgency if we are to deliver on our joint 
commitment. Now is the time for all Members to look towards  pragmatic solutions.  
 
As a number of our Ministers concluded at the October Ottawa Ministerial, "our resolve for change 
must be matched with action". In this spirit, Australia looks forward to working with all Members in 
2019 to improve, modernise and str engthen the WTO. As noted by the Director -General, we need to 
turn challenge into opportunity.  
 
11. Vanuatu (ACP)  
 
I take the floor on behalf of the ACP Group. Let me start by thanking the Director -General for his latest 
report and his persistent efforts to ad vance the agenda. I also wish to extend our gratitude to the 
Chairs of the different Negotiating Groups for their work and leadership under their respective 
responsibilities. My remarks today will also offload some of the main outcomes and messages from 
our Trade Ministers who met in Brussels on 24 October.  
 
To begin with, some of the main messages from our Ministers meeting is the continued support of the 
maintenance of the WTO multilateral rules -based trading system framework and operation including 
the p ractice of consensus decision -making which is the cornerstone of the institution. The Ministers 
also reaffirmed and maintained that the Doha Development Agenda issues continue to remain a 
priority for the ACP Group despite some signs of the issues being ne glected and sometimes even 
forgotten in the organization.  
 
Overall, the ACP Group has continued to actively participate in the agriculture, fisheries, CTS SS and 
CTD SS Negotiating Groups. Allow me to start with the work under the CTD SS where the ACP Group 
continued to work within the G -90 to consider our approaches and priorities on SDT proposals. Under 
the G -90, we continued consultations with the Chair to consider next steps on the G -90 proposals.  
 
Being the main demandeurs and beneficiaries, we hav e proposed and recommended a way forward in 
the process which will prioritise LDCs' and SVEs' interests in the process, then discuss flexibilities as 
needed for other developing countries. This is an approach the G -90 took in the penultimate months 
before the Nairobi Ministerial Conference. In the near future, we expect to further engage with 
Members moving forward and therefore call upon all Members to remain open in this engagement WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 70 - 
 
  process if we are to take any meaningful steps in addressing the real imba lances in global trade which 
more particularly affect the LDCs and SVEs. We have more than a decade of work resulting in principles 
emerging in the differentiated flexibilities designed in the 2008 Chair's texts for agriculture and NAMA.  
 
I also wish to re port that the Group participated in consultations by the Chair of the CTS SS. We 
continued to take note of the new proposals being pursued to create layers of meetings and 
exploratory discussions on market access. The ACP Group indicated that it is not nec essary to create 
a new process that supplants the operative negotiating guidelines and procedures as well as those 
developed under Annex C of the Hong Kong Declaration. On domestic regulation, the Group welcomes 
the renewed multilateral discussions within the context of the Working Party on Domestic Regulation.  
We reiterate that any discussions on domestic regulation must prioritise issues of interest to 
developing countries and LDCs and fully recognise our countries' right to regulate.  
 
In agriculture, w e recognise the active engagement pursued in the CoA SS through the presentation 
of analytical papers and presentations under the different pillars. We are still expecting new 
developments in the discussions that is able to garner a sufficient level of con vergence on the various 
issues. The ACP took note of the Chair's communication on the proposed way forward and we 
anticipate receiving an updated document in the near future, which, among other things, establishes 
the terms of reference for engagement in t he working groups, taking into the account the feedback 
from delegations during the CoA SS on 7 December. We have provided the Group's preliminary 
assessment on the Chair's plan for future groupings and configurations. We support the Chair's efforts 
provid ed the formats are open -ended, inclusive, representative and mindful of issues that are 
important to developing countries. This does not prevent the Chair from utilising breakout groups 
where needed, but the main format should allow for any interested dele gation to participate. 
Transparency is critical.  
   
In general, the ACP Group maintains that there is need for Members to take steps to eliminate trade -
distorting domestic supports that maintain gross imbalances including AMS entitlements, cotton, and 
take decisions on food security and other areas of most importance to weaker developing countries 
and LDCs which deserve priority attention.  
  
On fisheries, we expect to meet the instruction of Ministers last year to conclude by next year. The 
Group has thus been active in the fisheries negotiations. We continue to proactively advance our text 
with the aim to converge with other Members by next year to achieve the mandate of our Ministers.  
At the same time, we support subsidies disciplines that respect the ri ghts of coastal States and do not 
impose disproportionate burden on developing countries and LDCs. The work programme must be 
inclusive and sequential taking into account the capacity of small Missions and support funding for 
capital -based fisheries expert s of developing countries and LDCs as we forge ahead to conclude 
negotiations next year.  
 
I also wish to mention that on process, the ACP remains concerned with the scheduling of important 
meetings. Overlapping meetings makes it difficult, if not impossib le for small delegations to 
meaningfully participate in important meetings. Allow me, through the Director -General, to request 
that the Secretariat, working with the Chairpersons of the various Negotiating Groups and 
Committees, make every effort to avoid convening meetings in parallel.  
 
As we have continued to participate in the respective negotiations, it is disturbing that the current 
impasse in the appointment of Appellate Body members and other calls for reform may hinder our 
progress. Despite the Grou p not being active users of the dispute settlement mechanism, it is a priority 
that the deadlock is removed without which the ongoing negotiations and the overall system mean 
nothing and puts all the efforts being pursued in total vain. Continuation of the  impasse also cripples 
the institution where the same delegations lauded the dispute settlement system as the jewel in the 
crown of the WTO. Regarding other reform proposals, proposals to implement notification obligations 
must garner consensus with a view  to addressing developing country and LDC capacity constraints, 
but abandon punitive measures.   
 
The ACP also continues to take note of the discussions being pursued both in the WTO, and at high -
level meetings outside the WTO. We are monitoring the develo pments and efforts. In our collective 
pursuit of solutions in the WTO, principles of inclusivity, transparency, development and multilateral 
structures and negotiations, must be maintained as cardinal principles enshrined in the institution.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 71 - 
 
  Any discussio ns on WTO reform must take into account interests of the whole WTO Membership, 
including the ACP Group. We also continue to call upon you, your office and the institution to ensure 
neutrality, as international officials, during this critical and fragile ph ase in order to maintain a 
transparent, representative, and inclusive discussion in the WTO.  
 
12. European Union  
 
We thank the Director -General for convening this meeting today and for his debriefings regarding 
recent contacts. We also thank the Chairs of Nego tiating Groups for their reports. We agree with the 
Director -General that given the critical state the organization is in, there is no room for complacency. 
While the European Union does not believe that there is simple solution to the current trade tensio ns, 
we remain very worried about their impact on the multilateral trading system and on the WTO. 
Departing from existing rules is not only harmful to the system but also does not address durably the 
issues underlying the current crisis.  
 
The EU remains a staunch supporter of the rules -based trading system. The system has always served 
the shared interests of its Members, by ensuring a stable and predictable framework for global trade, 
with strong rules and enforcement tools. We would all lose from the coll apse of the system, and the 
weak would suffer the most.  
 
The current trade tensions have however revealed the shortcomings of the organization, for which we 
all share the responsibility. We have left too many issues unanswered and the system is no longer 
adapted to address many of today's global challenges. Earl ier this month, at their summit, the G20 
Leaders acknowledged as much this in their joint communiqué. Today, we call on, at least G20 
Members, to now engage on WTO reform.  
 
Over the last months, the EU has reached out to partners about WTO reform. The EU is ready to play 
a leadership role in the reform process that should be transparent and inclusive.  
 
To this end, we have worked with other Members to put forward concrete solutions in the different 
areas of the reform. We have in particular stepped up eff orts to unblock the appointment of Appellate 
Body members in the shortest delay. We have, together with a broad coalition of Members, tabled 
textual proposals to improve the dispute settlement system while addressing concerns expressed. We 
trust these prop osals provide a good basis for engagement and hope that we can initiate an in -depth 
process after the General Council meeting of this week.       
 
An efficient and independent dispute settlement system is key, but will not be enough to put the WTO 
back on track.  We need to advance as well on updating the rulebook to tackle the challenges that our 
economies are faced with and that, if unaddressed, will lead to an increased resort to managed trade.  
 
We have made clear where we should prioritise our efforts to develop new rules to fill the gap of the 
current rulebook. We are now intensifying work on future proposals, with a specific focus on 'level 
playing field' issues such as industrial subsidies and barriers to services and investment, and forced 
technolog y transfer. Our aim here is not to change Members' economic models but to make sure that 
certain policies and practices are not conducive to unfair trading environment. We hope all Members 
will engage constructively in the discussion. However, we are also ready to move forward with those 
willing to advance.  
 
As regards the reform of the monitoring function of the WTO, we welcome the substantive exchanges 
at the Council for Trade in Goods meeting in November on the proposal aimed at enhancing 
transparency a nd improving Members' compliance to notification. We are now working towards good 
progress by the next CTG meeting in the spring.  
 
In addition to reform efforts, we would like to progress on other issues. On e -commerce, it is 
encouraging to note that the open plurilateral track has allowed to conclude, in less than a year, 
exploratory talks. This shows that introducing flexibility in the process helps.  
 
We are however worried about the actual standstill of negotiations on fisheries subsidies, 
notwithstand ing the large amount of brainstorming activities as reported by Ambassador Zapata. We 
should remind ourselves of our Ministers' commitment in Buenos Aires a year ago, and actively work 
on bridging the gaps so that the conclusion of a meaningful agreement n ext year comes within reach.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 72 - 
 
  The EU also remains ready to advance negotiations on agriculture. After the failure in MC11, there is 
first a need to build confidence. In that regard, improving transparency in agriculture is a crucial 
element. The availabili ty, in time, of reliable and pertinent facts and figures is of the essence for a 
sound debate on new disciplines.    
 
I have just outlined the different initiatives that the EU has taken over the last months to reform the 
WTO. There are now concrete propos als on the table that are supported by a broad coalition of 
Members, from developing as well as from developed economies. This is however only a first step.   
 
It will be important for other Members engage constructively. We count on your support and 
leade rship, as well as of the Chairs of the relevant Bodies and Committees, to make this happen.  
 
13. Uruguay (Informal Working Group on MSMEs)  
 
This intervention was carried out in my capacity as General Coordinator of the Informal Working Group 
on MSMEs, which, a s everyone knows, remains open to the participation of all WTO Members. In this 
regard, I use this opportunity to announce that we have reached the mark of 89 Members, with the 
recent incorporation of Armenia. The list of Members was updated by document JO B/GC/208.  
 
The work of our informal group in the current year was mainly devoted to conducting thematic sessions 
that allowed covering almost all the topics identified by the Ministers in the Joint Declaration signed 
in Buenos Aires in December 2017. The meetings plenaries, meanwhile, served to openly discuss and 
reflect on the progress of work.  
 
We also had the opportunity to carry out a consultation process. In this regard, on 21 -22 November, 
I met with delegations to gather views on the most effective a nd efficient way to promote the work of 
our group during 2019.  
 
We ended the year with an open plenary meeting that allowed us to discuss and adjust our work plan 
for next year.  
 
I invite you to consult the document JOB/GC/207 that contains the annual repo rt of our activities.  
 
Next, I will summarise some of the key messages that are the rectors of our shared interests for the 
MSMEs Group with respect to 2019:  
 
• In principle, we held four plenary meetings based on a pre -established agenda or "standing 
agenda " that we trust will give Members the flexibility to carry forward and promote 
proposals.  
 
• We are convinced of the need to adopt a proactive approach and move to a stage of concrete 
proposals.  
 
• We value the exercises that aim to share experiences and refle ct on best practices and 
experiences of Members.  
 
• We are convinced of the importance of deploying maximum efforts to disseminate our work 
and project our efforts beyond the Members of the Informal Group. We aspire to relate to all 
WTO Members constructivel y, since we reaffirm the importance of achieving multilateral 
results.  
 
• Interaction with the private sector, for its part, deserves to consider spaces for dialogue that 
allow us to capitalise on inputs in favour of MSMEs around the world.  
 
In conclusion, I  would like to remind everyone present that inclusion and transparency are 
fundamental principles that govern the functioning of our Informal Working Group on MSMEs. In 
addition, I reiterate that our group remains completely open to receiving new Members a nd proposals 
for work or observations, both from Members and non -Members.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 73 - 
 
  14. Uruguay  
 
Uruguay reiterates its commitment to the multilateral trading system based on rules that has its apex 
in the World Trade Organization.  
 
This system is especially relevant for developing countries and, in particular, for the achievement of 
the Sustainable Development Goals of the 2030 Agenda.  
 
To do this and to demonstrate that the organization is still capable of producing concrete and 
significant results, it is essential t o unlock and reinvigorate its negotiating function. In this regard, it 
is important to point out the importance of successfully concluding fishing negotiations by the end of 
next year, thus fulfilling the first goal of the SDGs.  
 
In the same sense, Uruguay  reaffirms that it is essential to continue with the reform process 
established in Art. XX of the Agreement on Agriculture. In addition to constituting the great unfinished 
mandate since the creation of this organization, this negotiation is vital to meet the demands of global 
food security, especially of developing countries, and for the development of sustainable productive 
and commercial practices from the point of view of the conservation of the environment. Uruguay 
wishes to highlight, in particular, t he need to reduce domestic support and achieve greater access to 
markets in agriculture, as has already occurred in other sectors under negotiation during the last 
Uruguay Round.  
 
On the other hand, it should be noted that in the last months of this year, we have witnessed the 
presentation of several reform proposals of this organization aimed at addressing the challenges 
imposed by the international context. We welcome these initiatives and express our commitment to 
work in the search for agreements that a llow us, respecting the fundamental principles of the 
organization, to make the WTO a tool that best serves the interests of its Members.  
 
Finally, we would like to emphasise the importance that whatever is the result of such discussions, 
the Dispute Settl ement System preserves its essential characteristics.  
 
Finally, Uruguay reiterates once again the imperative need to proceed to restore the full operational 
capacity of the Appellate Body in order to ensure the proper functioning of the System and to avoid  
situations that make it even more difficult to seek consensus and effective solutions, such as it is the 
shared desire for the good of this organization.  
 
15. China  
 
I would like to begin by thanking the Director -General for the briefing of his recent activit ies, and the 
Chairs of Negotiating Groups for their updates.  
 
Today I do not intend to repeat China's positions on various specific topics, but to touch upon the 
issue of WTO reform which is getting popular in this organization and elsewhere. I know some p eople 
are in favour of this issue while some others are quite cautious, some are optimistic while some others 
feel the opposite, and some take quick actions while some others respond slowly. But what I want to 
convey to the entire Membership here is that a t this critical moment when the multilateral trading 
system is facing severe challenges, China is willing and ready to do its due part. We support necessary 
reform of the WTO, in order to enhance its authority and efficacy, to build an open world economy.  
 
The Chinese Government recently put forward three basic principles and five suggestions on WTO 
reform, which I believe many colleagues are aware. Please allow me to take this opportunity to 
elaborate a bit more so that Members could have a better and a mo re comprehensive understanding.  
 
Firstly, the WTO reform shall preserve the core values of the multilateral trading system, including 
non-discrimination and openness. We shall uphold the primacy of the multilateral trading system, and 
reinforce the central ity of the multilateral trading system in international trade liberalization and 
facilitation.  
 
The reform shall place the priority on addressing the existential problems faced by the WTO, which 
are, to take up and resolve the issue of Appellate Body member appointment blockage as soon as 
possible, rein in actions of unilateralism and protectionism with the strings of the WTO rules, and 
ensure the smooth functioning of all aspects of the WTO.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 74 - 
 
  On rule -making and negotiations, the WTO reform shall addres s the imbalance of trade rules and 
respond to the latest developments of our times: on the one hand, to address the long -term distortion 
of international agricultural trade by over -subsidization from developed Members, and prevent abuse 
of trade remedy mea sures; on the other hand, to keep the WTO rules relevant by including 21st 
century issues such as Investment Facilitation for Development, E -Commerce and MSMEs, and 
concluding fisheries subsidies negotiation next year. Further, the reform shall respect Mem bers' 
development models, and address the abuse by some developed Members of export control measures 
in obstructing technology cooperation. China opposes special and discriminatory disciplines against 
state-owned -enterprises in the name of WTO reform.  
 
Secondly, the WTO reform shall safeguard the development interests of developing Members, and 
address the difficulties developing Members encounter in their integration into economic globalization, 
by providing developing Members with flexibility and policy s pace, or special and differential treatment, 
needed for their economic development.  
 
In this regard, developing Members are capacity -constrained in various aspects, which is the most 
realistic difficulty to them. Therefore, it is reasonable that the very f irst thing the entire Membership 
should consider, when initiating or negotiating a topic, is the capacity constraint of developing 
Members.  
 
China is the largest developing country in the world, and is willing to take up commitments and make 
further contri butions commensurate with its level of development and economic capability. However, 
China will never agree to be deprived of its constitutional entitlement to special and differential 
treatment as a developing Member.  
 
The Director -General just mentioned the South -South Dialogue on LDCs and Development held last 
Friday, participated by DDG Agah and many Ambassadors of LDCs. The discussion was very insightful, 
and we will continue to organise similar events in the future.  
 
Thirdly, we all know where the cri sis of WTO comes from, but whatever a particular country or a 
particular individual thinks about the WTO, it can only serve as the context rather than the reason for 
the reform of the WTO. In the reform process, the inclusion of agenda, the formulation of any work 
plan as well as the final outcomes shall be undertaken through extensive consultations, based on 
mutual respect and dialogues on equal footing. The process shall be inclusive and open to all Members.  
We may go along with the notion that Members ag ree, maybe starting with groups of like -minded 
ones, to explore the way forward on some issues. At the same time however, we also need to duly 
consider the views and needs of developing Members and fully consult with them.  
 
All in all, we need to go step b y step to achieve gradual progress instead of imposing one's position 
on others. The reform cannot be dictated by a few, nor decided by an exclusive small group of 
Members. Should any multilateral disciplines be achieved, Members shall follow the practice of 
decision -making by consensus.  
 
16. Benin (C -4) 
 
I am making this statement on behalf of the Group of the four co -sponsors of the Sectoral Initiative 
in favour of Cotton (C -4), in the absence of the Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Benin and 
Coordinator of the Group, who could not be here.  
 
The C -4 thanks the Director -General for his report on the status of the multilateral trade negotiations 
and for the information he has shared with us about developments in recent months.  
 
We also thank the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for the impetus they have given to our work.  
 
We support the statements made by the African Group, the LDC Group, the ACP Group and the G -33. 
 
The C -4 would like to inform all WTO Members that the Ministers of Trade of the four co -sponsors of 
the Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton at the World Trade Organization in Geneva met at the Sixth 
Regular C -4 Coordination Meeting held in N'Djamena, Chad on 15 and 16 November.  
 
In the course of the meeting, the C -4 Ministers, hav ing examined the development of the negotiations 
and assessed the negative impact on economies and social conditions of domestic support that creates WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 75 - 
 
  distortion of export subsidies and of any other form of cotton subsidy with equivalent effects granted 
by certain WTO Members and having reviewed all the outcomes of the Eleventh Ministerial Conference 
of the World Trade Organization held in Buenos Aires, Argentina from 10 -13 December 2017, 
expressed deep concern at the lack of substantial outcomes in the mult ilateral trade negotiations on 
domestic support for cotton despite the mandate issued in December 2005 in Hong Kong, China.  
 
They stressed once again the importance of cotton for social, economic and structural conditions in 
African countries and the least -developed countries in general, and in the countries that co -sponsor 
the Sectoral Initiative in Favour of Cotton in particular, and the crucial role of the cotton sector in 
achieving the Sustainable Development Goals notably as regards the fight against p overty and the 
contribution to food security in cotton producing and exporting African countries and LDCs.  
 
At the end of the meeting, the C -4 Ministers urgently called upon all WTO Members that grant domestic 
support that distorts the international cotton  market to strive for further progress in the work on 
cotton and to notify, on a regular basis and for the purpose of greater transparency, up to date 
information on the domestic support granted to their producers, with a view to meeting the objectives 
set for this vital issue as quickly as possible.  
 
They emphasised the need to explore all possible solutions that would adequately respond to and take 
into consideration the vital and trade -related concerns of several million producers regarding domestic 
support for cotton.  
 
We would particularly like to thank Ambassador Ford, Chair of the CoA SS, Mr Alan Wolff, Deputy 
Director General of the WTO, and the WTO Secretariat for their valued contributions to the Tenth 
Dedicated Discussion of the Relevant Trade Rel ated Developments in Market Access, Domestic Support 
and Export Competition for Cotton and to the Thirtieth Round of the WTO Director -General's 
Consultative Framework Mechanism on Cotton, and for their efforts to facilitate the negotiations on 
cotton at th e WTO.  
 
The two meetings dedicated to cotton at the WTO in November were very productive in terms of 
Members' participation and their contribution to the search for appropriate solutions to both the trade -
related and the development -related aspects of the problems in the cotton sector.  
 
The Tenth Dedicated Discussion on Cotton was a constructive session in terms of transparency on the 
trade -related aspects of the cotton issue, especially since Members had the opportunity to assess the 
statistical data and t rade information available at the time.  
 
We must continue along this path and achieve a more detailed analysis of the disaggregated data 
concerning forms of support for cotton.  
 
With regard to the development -related aspects of the issue, the C -4 would lik e to inform Members 
that some very interesting presentations about activities were given, including, among others, 
presentations on:  
 
• the development of cotton by -products in C -4 countries;  
• the reclamation of crop land in the production zone of C -4 countri es; 
• the use of soil improving plants and calcium phosphate amendment in various agro ecological 
zones to improve soil health in cotton basins;  
• the introduction of new varieties of cotton in cotton growing areas.  
 
The C -4 urges all Members to support, throu gh bilateral, regional and multilateral cooperation, the 
implementation of these first activities under the "Cotton Route" project.  
 
The C -4 remains convinced that, by joining forces and renewing our commitment, we will obtain 
appropriate responses to the vital cotton issue.  
 
17. Panama (Article XII Members)  
 
I am speaking on behalf of the Group of Article XII Members. We have seen the intensification of 
discussions these past few months on improving the WTO. We would like to reiterate our Group's 
commitment to  strengthening the multilateral trading system and attending the imbalances that have 
accumulated in the past two decades.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 76 - 
 
  These imbalances are quite evident in, among other aspects, the gap between the concessions made 
by the Article XII Members and the original Members of the WTO. We must address these important 
differences to achieve a level and fair playing field for all Members.  
 
Our Group has been active in the Committee in Agriculture in Special Session voicing the need to 
attend the differences in agriculture commitments between the Article XII and the original Members 
such as in domestic support. The disparity in Agriculture Market Access is perhaps the most striking. 
The average agriculture bound tariff of the original Members is four times higher  than that of the 
Article XII Members. We have vouched to actively participate in the new format that has been proposed 
by the Chair for the start of 2019.  
  
We find analogous situations in Non -Agriculture Market Access. The average bound tariff of all ori ginal 
Members is three times the average of Article XII Members. Article XII Members have 100% bound 
coverage. This is not the case for many of the original Members whose bound coverage average is 
74.5%, and only 37 of the original Members have 100% covera ge. Studies conducted by the WTO 
Secretariat have shown that a higher binding coverage leads to an increase in trade as uncertainty is 
reduced. Thus, a level playing field that addresses the existing imbalances will produce global benefits.  
In Services, Ar ticle XII Members on average have commitments in 107 sectors, whereas the average 
original Member has commitments in 42. Article XII Members have also undertaken more 
commitments in virtually every subsector.  
 
The data is clear: Article XII Members have m ade greater and more extensive commitments than the 
original Members. These gaps will surely widen as the currently acceding governments are asked to 
leap over an ever -higher bar of commitments in their path to WTO Membership.  
   
We must continue our work to strengthen all sectors and pillars of our multilateral trading system. 
Addressing the imbalances in the commitments of Members is an important part of our work.  
 
I take this opportunity to reiterate our group's commitment to a successful outcome in the  ongoing 
negotiations to ensure fair play conditions for different groups of WTO Members.  
 
18. Panama  
 
We wish to thank the Director -General and the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for the reports 
submitted. We trust that, with the Director -General's guidance  and the constructive participation of 
all Members, regardless of their level of development or their share in trade, we will achieve a 
revitalised and inclusive multilateral system that contributes effectively to development.  
 
Panama is committed to parti cipating actively in and contributing to any dialogue or initiative – 
preferably multilateral, but without excluding other formats – that would help us to adapt our 
organization to current trends and new challenges.  
 
In agriculture, we are participating ac tively in thematic sessions through the groups to which we 
belong and which we represent. We consider it a priority to address the existing imbalances between 
the commitments of Members that acceded to the organization under Article XII and those of the 
original Members. It is necessary to reduce the high levels of domestic support that distort markets. 
We are committed to pursuing dialogue to find permanent solutions with regard to public stocks and 
a safeguard mechanism, which would be available to all de veloping country Members, and whose 
application would not adversely affect other developing country Members.  
 
It is necessary, particularly in agriculture, to fully comply with the requirements for the submission of 
notifications and to improve transparency. This enables us to understand the new realities and needs 
in respect of Members' public policies. In this regard, we are pleased to inform you that Panama was 
up to date with its notification commitments until 2017.  
 
The liberalization of tra de in services is a priority for Panama. The negotiations on services are a 
neglected part of the built -in agenda of the WTO Agreements. Together with other delegations, in 
2018, we put forward a proposal for exploratory discussions on greater market acces s. We remain 
committed to this process. In 2019, we will make new contributions, as a group and as a delegation, 
to identify spaces and opportunities enabling Members to increase their participation, improve their 
competitiveness and achieve further integr ation in both global and regional services value chains.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 77 - 
 
  In 2018, we have carried out intensive work in the negotiations on fisheries subsidies, together with 
five other Latin American countries. We would like to thank the Chair and the Secretariat for th eir 
efforts that have enabled us to adopt a new work programme for the first half of 2019, which is flexible 
and adapted to the needs and urgency of the negotiations, is driven by Members, and reflects their 
main considerations.  
 
In this connection, we hop e that, in 2019, we will step up text -based negotiations in the formats 
required, while maintaining the principles of inclusiveness and transparency, which will allow us to 
reach an agreement in accordance with the mandate established by our Ministers at t he Buenos Aires 
Ministerial Conference.  
 
With regard to the Dispute Settlement Body in Special Session, we joined three other delegations in 
expressing the need to create a work schedule that allows for a more focused and efficient discussion.  
 
We share th e concerns raised by others regarding the possible paralysis of the Appellate Body. It is 
therefore necessary to find a solution as a matter of urgency.  
 
We also welcome and highlight the importance of the other work carried out, in which progress has 
been made towards identifying topics of particular interest for Members, including the structured 
discussions on investment facilitation for development, and the work of the Informal Working Group 
on MSMEs.  
 
Of special importance for all Members is the work ca rried out under the E -commerce Joint Initiative, 
which has underscored the role of e -commerce as a modality and tool for facilitating trade in goods 
and services, rather than as a sector. It is imperative to make significant progress in this area. In 
terms  of the intermediate results that could be achieved, without the need to reach an overall 
agreement on e -commerce, Panama is in favour of making permanent the moratorium on customs 
duties on electronic transmissions.  
 
In conclusion, we confirm our commitme nt to the work of this organization and to multilateralism, 
with the aim of finding solutions that will deliver concrete results in various areas in 2019.  
 
19. Switzerland  
 
This year has been fraught with major challenges for international trade and for the mu ltilateral trading 
system. Increasing trade tensions carry the potential of impacting global trade, with negative effects 
on growth and jobs. It is therefore important to deploy all available means to de -escalate the situation. 
Dialogue and actions should be stepped up to address present and future challenges.  
 
Discussions on WTO reform or modernization have gained momentum in different circles over the last 
months. Several initiatives and concrete proposals by Members aiming at improving the WTO 
demonstrat e genuine willingness to look for solutions. Even if the approaches may vary and different 
courses of action are subsumed under the notion of reform.  
 
In this context, four challenges remain paramount:  
 
• safeguarding and strengthening the dispute settlement  system;  
 
• adjusting trade rules, amongst others to take into account the realities of the  
21st century;  
 
• improving the efficiency of the WTO monitoring function (incl. transparency,  
notifications and the functioning of WTO committees);  
 
• elaborating a new a pproach to trade and development.  
 
Switzerland invites all Members to seek concrete ways to advance the trade agenda and to preserve 
the relevance and credibility of the multilateral trading system.  
 
In this context, it is key to address the rise of digita l technologies. This sweeping evolution calls for 
an update of the regulatory framework. The Buenos Aires Joint Initiatives such as on MSMEs, 
Investment Facilitation and especially e -commerce are welcome initial responses to the new challenges WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 78 - 
 
  posed by the  modern economy. For instance, it is only logical that e -commerce, as a global 
phenomenon, requires global governance. An open -ended process in the WTO context provides a solid 
starting point towards future multilateral rules. Switzerland is willing to con tribute constructively to 
the talks and to bring them to the next stage.  
 
Furthermore, the completion of the negotiations on fisheries subsidies is key for advancing the trade 
agenda, as fully recognised by the international community. Here, the WTO is tas ked with making an 
important contribution to the SDGs. A timely delivery on fisheries subsidies shall in and of itself 
constitute a priority goal for our organization, regardless of developments in other areas.  
 
The current rise of protectionist measures i s a matter of concern to many. A rules -based multilateral 
trading system with a functioning dispute settlement mechanism is key to preserving the benefits of 
international trade. It is therefore important that the pending process to refill the vacancies at  the AB 
be resumed without delay. At the same time, a process should be launched to address the concerns 
raised in order to safeguard and strengthen the system for the future.  
 
Switzerland stands ready to devise actions for improving the system under the W TO umbrella. We are 
pleased to participate in and to support the process coordinated by Canada. Improving the WTO is 
however a task of importance to all Members. This should not be an exclusive process. We hope that 
all the protagonists will join this ende avour.  
 
20. Brazil  
 
We thank the Director -General for his report and insight on the main challenges facing our 
organization.  
 
Our appreciation also goes to the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups who presented their reports today.  
 
We appreciate the efforts by the Chairs to reinvigorate discussions in important negotiating pillars, 
such as the establishment of thematic groups in agricultural negotiations. Changes in structures or 
working methods, however, will tend to have limited ef fect if Members do not adopt a flexible and 
constructive approach.  
 
Since our October meeting, the importance of the multilateral trading system, with possible reforms 
to improve its functioning, has been reaffirmed at political level meetings, such as th e Ministerial 
Meeting of the Canadian Initiative, held in Ottawa at the end of October, and the recent G20 Summit, 
in Buenos Aires.  
 
Tensions between major trading nations, the threat of protectionism and the delay to address the 
crisis in the dispute set tlement pillar remain, however, as significant risk factors to the system.  
 
The first challenge, from Brazil's viewpoint, is to preserve the system. As the Director -General has 
stated before, no system is perfect. Brazil believes that current WTO rules an d principles provide us 
with a crucial framework for our trade policies. The most urgent task in preserving the system is to 
restore the dispute settlement mechanism, in particular the Appellate Body, to its full strength, by 
unblocking the selection proce sses for vacancies in the Appellate Body.  
 
In the next General Council, two days from now, we will have the opportunity to discuss some 
proposals aimed at improving the system. I will reserve specific comments for that occasion. Today, 
I will simply reaff irm that Brazil remains ready to engage constructively on ways to address the 
concerns of any Member regarding the Dispute Settlement System. But we continue to believe that 
the link between AB issues and the selection process is not helpful and tends to o verlook the urgency 
of the matter.  
 
As regards the negotiating agenda, the notion of WTO reform seems to be gathering momentum. We 
are less concerned about how this process will be labelled than about how it is conducted and its 
consequences. For Brazil, w hat matters is to reinvigorate the WTO negotiating arm.  
 
The views on the meaning and direction of reform seem still very divergent at this stage. The 
fundamental principle for Brazil is that the definition of a reform agenda, if it is to succeed, will ha ve 
to be inclusive and balanced – all Members must have their voices heard and the different interests 
and perspectives within the Membership will have to be taken into account.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 79 - 
 
  Regardless of how issues will be categorised or clustered, as "pending" issue s, "new" issues or "reform" 
issues – or of whether all negotiating issues would be placed under an umbrella of WTO reform – 
Agriculture remains of paramount importance for Brazil. It would also, in our view, be key to achieving 
development outcomes, given its central role in most developing economies. We are also committed 
to fulfilling the mandate to conclude fisheries subsidies negotiations by the end of 2019.  
 
Brazil is ready to work constructively in other areas as well. Regarding the monitoring pillar,  Brazil has 
presented proposals with a view to improving the work of the regular Committees, particularly in the 
context of the SPS and TBT Committees' Reviews, as well as in the Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administration (WT/BFA/462), with a view to advancing the mandate established in paragraph 29 
of the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration.  
 
We have also been active in the context of the Initiatives resulting from the Joint Ministerial 
Statements in Buenos Aires, all of which were joined by Brazil. Our g overnment has circulated ideas 
on investment facilitation, in document JOB/GC/169, and on e -commerce, in documents JOB/GC/176 
and JOB/GC/203. Likewise, we are focused on making progress in the joint initiative on MSMEs.  
 
Some developed Members tend to cons ider that our negotiating agenda will remain blocked as long 
as there is not a new vision to address development issues; however, it would be misleading to think 
that this is the main explanation for the deadlock in our negotiating agenda. On the contrary,  a 
stubborn focus on this issue could lead to further paralysis.  
 
Whatever the direction of discussions, it is crucial to draw a line between "old" and "new" S&DT. S&DT 
incorporated in existing agreements reflects a balance of concessions, in which develo ping Members 
accepted substantial commitments in Services, TRIMS, TRIPS and other areas. Developed Members, 
on the other hand, were the main beneficiaries of agricultural disciplines which provided them with 
substantial leeway for trade distorting policies . This is the real imbalance that needs to be addressed. 
With regard to "new" S&DT, Brazil is open to participate in a focused, pragmatic and flexible discussion 
on the scope of S&DT rules in new agreements and rules.  
 
In conclusion, there is a limited tim eframe for action in light of the significant strains on the multilateral 
trading system, especially with regard to the AB crisis. If we fail to act, this could have far -reaching 
implications. We believe it is possible to safeguard the core values of the m ultilateral trading system, 
while also engaging in necessary reforms and negotiations, with a constructive approach. Brazil is 
ready to contribute to these efforts.  
 
21. Sri Lanka  
 
At the outset, let me join others to convey my delegation's appreciation to the Director -General and 
the Chairpersons of the respective Negotiating Groups on their reports.  
 
We are facing a wide range of challenges in the global trading system today. I wi sh to echo one of the 
most recent statements of the Director -General that, we have "a once -in-a-generation opportunity to 
renew the trading system". Towards this end, we welcome the G20 declaration which recognises that 
the multilateral trading system cont inues to play a positive economic role and contains a commitment 
to trade as an engine of growth, productivity, innovation, job creation and development.  
 
The World Trade Outlook Indicator has signalled further loss of momentum in world trade growth. The 
most recent World Trade Outlook Indicator reading of 98.6 has marked the lowest since its launch. 
The value below the baseline value of 100 signals that trade growth in the coming months is expected 
to be below -trend. The indicator further reveals that the anticipated trade expansion to slow down to 
3.7% in 2019 from 4.7% in 2017.  
 
This escalating trade tension has brought many challenges to developing countries and in particular 
to smaller economies. My country as a small and vulnerable economy and also a net food importing 
developing country, is going through adverse experience resulting in high import bills, domestic 
inflation, and local currency depreciation against major currencies.  
 
Sri Lanka is a great believer of the multilateral trading system. The  current systemic issues that 
brought uncertainty to multilateral rules -based system are of great concern to us. My delegation 
believes that the significant changes taken place in the global trading environment should adequately WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 80 - 
 
  reflect in the rules -based multilateral trading system, without affecting its fundamental principles that 
we all negotiated and agreed to preserve.   
 
We also believe that any such reflection in the multilateral rules should be able to maintain the 
fundamental focus on trade and dev elopment. While accepting the need of reforms to the multilateral 
trading system to reflect current realities, it should not dilute development needs of developing 
countries. My delegation believes that it is our collective responsibility to engage in the WTO reform 
discussions with the aim of addressing the major concerns and making this august institution more 
effective in managing and safeguarding the multilateral trading system.  
 
With regard to ongoing negotiations on fisheries at the Rules Negotiating  Group, the four Incubator 
Groups actively took forward the discussions while generating some good new ideas. My delegation 
strongly believes that we all should work for introducing clear, simple and implementable disciplines 
by 2020. However, we are mindf ul that it is a difficult task as related subject issues are complex and 
have different stances to different nations. This was also emphasised this morning. We have also 
identified some gaps existing between trade negotiators and fisheries experts in the C apital. Although 
the capital -based fisheries authorities are conversant with the conservation and management of the 
fishery resources in their respective areas, we observe that there is a serious gap in understanding 
the application of WTO rules -based syst em. In order to have meaningful outcome of disciplines, it is 
vital that these gaps are addressed. Hence, I have emphasised several times the importance of 
organising technical level workshops at regional level targeting developing countries who lack inter -
connectivity.  
 
While recognising the work of four main Committees on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, 
my delegation noted that most of the discussions are focused on the benefits of e -commerce. Sri 
Lanka is however concerned on whether every cou ntry is equally ready with the necessary 
infrastructure and other requirements to have a fair share of these benefits.  
 
The dispute settlement system is one of the key pillars of the WTO's transparency mechanism and all 
Members have the obligation to ensur e the effective functioning of the system. Hence, it is a grave 
concern for us that what would be the future of the Appellate Body of the WTO. My delegation requests 
all parties to join hands to resolve this fundamental issue which has a bearing on the eff ectiveness of 
this august institution. In this regard, my delegation welcomes the recent proposals put forward by 
several Members to the attention of the General Council this Wednesday.  
 
22. Angola  
 
I would like to thank the Chairs of the negotiating groups fo r their comprehensive and informative 
reports.  
 
My delegation aligns itself with the statement made by Central African Republic, on behalf of the LDC, 
by Malawi, on behalf of the ACP, and by South Africa, on behalf of the African Group.  
 
The need for refo rm of the multilateral trading system has always been present since the creation of 
the WTO. The reform is spelled out in the Marrakesh Agreement which stipulates as one of its function 
as a forum for trade negotiations.  
 
The reform is the reason for launching the Doha Development Agenda, intended, in our view, to 
"correct" some imbalances of previous negotiations rounds.  
 
My delegation therefore supports any proposal for a reform of the multilateral trading system on the 
condition that this reform rei nforces the objective of "raising [the population] standards of living" as 
set out on the Preamble of the Marrakesh Agreement. Any reform that allows the development of our 
countries deserves our support.  
 
It is in this spirit that we have been analysing a ll the proposals that have been tabled by some 
Members. For example, we all agree on the importance of notifications for transparency of Members' 
trade policies and for enhancing the predictability of trade relations. However, we are not in favour of 
punitive administrative measures and a financial sanction against Members, particularly LDCs, who 
fall short of notifying. The constraints faced by LDCs in terms of human and institutional capacity as 
well as the complexity of those procedures should not be ign ored. 
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 81 - 
 
  With regard to the DDA negotiations, allow us to highlight the importance of Special and Differential 
Treatment, which must be an integral part of any future multilateral outcomes and be precise, effective 
and operational to enable developing countr ies, including LDCs, to address their development needs.  
 
In agriculture, which is a key sector for Angola, the reform of domestic support by reducing or 
eliminating subsidies that are trade distorting Agricultural trade, remains a priority for my delegati on.  
 
Regarding fisheries, it is important to fulfil the mandate of the Ministers to conclude the negotiations 
by next year. For Angola, the negotiations in this area must preserve the sustainable development of 
our fishing industry, mainly artisanal and f or the subsistence purposes.  
 
Finally, we appeal to all Members to continue a frank and constructive dialogue, and not to lose the 
focus that "developing countries needs and interests" are at the heart of this Round.  
 
23. Russian Federation  
 
I would like to th ank the Director -General and the Negotiating Group Chairs for their update on the 
state of play.  
 
Speaking about the state of the WTO as a whole, Russia's assessment would be "not quite working". 
Many bodies do not perform their functions, or perform them ineffectively. The authority and efficacy 
of the WTO has been significantly undermined, in particular, by protectionist measures and unilateral 
actions. The reform of the organization is needed.  
 
In this respect, Russia welcomes the G20 Leaders' Declaratio n, which reaffirms a basic commitment 
by the world's biggest economies to multilateral trade and a "rules -based international order that is 
capable of effectively responding to a rapidly changing world". This compromise language on trade 
keeps the basic pr inciples of the multilateral trading system, on which most of the leaders in Buenos 
Aires insisted. At the same time, the text acknowledges problems and contains a commitment to 
address them. Our leaders agreed to make significant progress on WTO reform be fore the next G20 
summit in Osaka next June.  
 
Here in Geneva, we should respond to this appeal. In Russia's view, the reform should preserve the 
core value and fundamental principles of the WTO and promote further trade liberalization. The 
substance of the  reform should be developed collectively and reflect interests of all WTO Members.  
 
Strengthening the dispute settlement function of the WTO is one of the key priorities of the WTO 
reform. We therefore urge for an immediate start of the Appellate Body memb ers' selection, as an 
essential prerequisite for stable and effective functioning of the WTO dispute settlement system.  
 
Russia takes note of different proposals on WTO reform, in particular the one by the European Union. 
We shall discuss it at the General  Council meeting under the relevant agenda item.  
 
While addressing pressing challenges, such as the Appellate Body issues, we also need to work equally 
hard on achieving the outcomes that the WTO was designed to deliver. I would like to take this 
opportuni ty today to share with you what Russia views as the key areas and issues moving forward.  
 
In fisheries subsidies, the incubator group process played a positive role. Now, we need to move to a 
more flexible and Member -driven mode of engagement, so that the result of the brainstorming 
exercise eventually transform into tangible negotiating progress. This will be achievable only if 
Members show significant flexibility and agree on the basic architecture of future disciplines as soon 
as possible with high stand ard of transparency to be maintained.  
 
Agriculture is very important and sensitive for most delegations. Our task is to level the playing field 
in agriculture and allow all Members to compete on an equal footing. Many analytical papers came 
out, but still a lot of work remains to be done. Russia thanks Ambassador Deep Ford for the new 
approaches introduced in the agriculture negotiations. Many Members reaffirmed that domestic 
support remains the priority issue. I do believe that we have to build on this mom entum. Current 
subsidies entitlements of Members cannot be treated as fair and reasoned. A big gap between initial 
Members and those who acceded after 1995 exists, and this gap is based on historical advantages and 
not rooted in economic realities.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 82 - 
 
  Russia  appreciates the substantial ongoing efforts under the Buenos Aires "joint initiatives", which we 
look upon as a valuable addition to the multilateral format.  
 
We have made good progress in discussions on electronic commerce. It was very useful for us to h ear 
how various problems of electronic commerce have been transferred to textual provisions in national 
legislation and regional trade agreements. At the next stage, we would like to deepen our analysis 
and hear how these provisions work in practice. It is  important to understand what problems Members 
face when implementing them and which approaches are more attractive for business, consumers and 
governments.  
 
Similarly, structured discussions on investment facilitation for development are on good track. Ba sed 
on the exchange of experience between Members with the participation of international organizations, 
we now have a set of issues that could form the basis for further work in this area.  
 
Concerning domestic regulation in services, we managed to find ma ny compromise alternatives for 
the main disciplines of the text. This will help us to move on to the next step – reaching a common 
understanding on the so -called modalities of the text. We look forward to the active participation of 
other Members in our co nstructive debates.  
 
We welcome the approval by the informal Working Group on MSMEs of the work programme for 2019 
as a way forward to achieve concrete results at the next Ministerial Conference. Suggested shift 
towards proposal -driven discussion is what w e need to develop a formal work programme for MSMEs. 
As before, Russia will continue to engage actively in this work.  
 
To conclude, I would like to stress the importance of upholding the integrity and values of the WTO. I 
think this is an important call w hich we all need to keep in mind.  
 
24. Republic of Korea  
 
The Republic of Korea thanks the Director -General and the Chairs of Negotiating Groups and initiatives 
for sharing the assessments on the current situation.  
 
Just about a year ago, Minister Malcorra re minded us in this room that "There is life after Buenos 
Aires." That life has been lived for about a year now, and we are here to take stock of the discussions 
that took place, where we have made progress, and which progress we have yet to make.  
 
First, M embers are actively engaging in discussions on traditional issues: agriculture and fisheries 
subsidies.  
 
Regarding agriculture, Members have engaged in discussions which are data -based, technical and 
open-ended. These discussions not only helped Members interact more with each other but also helped 
enhance the understanding of relevant issues. The Republic of  Korea appreciates the efforts put forth 
by the Chair of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session in this regard. Korea hopes that a 
pragmatic timeline leading up to the Twelfth Ministerial Conference will be set up to facilitate such 
opportunities.   
 
Regarding fisheries subsidies, Members, together with the stewardship of the Chair of the Negotiating 
Group on Rules, worked diligently in the Incubator Group process and have made meaningful progress. 
It is expected that Members will shift gear to a su bstantive negotiating mode next year. I hope this 
exemplary track record will continue in 2019 and lead to a significant outcome as an important 
negotiation deliverable of the Twelfth Ministerial Conference.  
 
Second, like -minded Members are working proact ively to continue the exploratory work on new 
agenda such as e -commerce, MSMEs and women and trade.  
 
The exploratory work on e -commerce in the context of the Joint Statement Initiative has been very 
active. Korea will continue to support the initiative an d looks forward to moving on to the next phase 
towards negotiation.  
 
The Informal Working Group on MSMEs has continued its work through various channels and in 
different formats, and it is now looking to start its thematic work to come up with more concre te WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 83 - 
 
  results. I believe the work of this group will become a valuable asset and resource for the MSMEs of 
all Members.  
 
Korea has also made efforts to contribute to the women and trade issue, for example, by organising 
a workshop on "Women in Global Value Ch ains" last October here in Geneva along with other MIKTA 
countries.  
 
Last but not least, there still remains a greater and overarching issue that has pervaded our dialogue 
in and out of the WTO: that is, how we can modernise and update the WTO to restore its relevance.  
 
I believe Members have a shared understanding of the importance and necessity of this work. In 
reflection of this common recognition, Members are engaging in discussions within various groups and 
through different channels.  
 
Korea has als o actively participated in discussions including those led by Canada, the European Union, 
and others. Participation in the Ottawa Ministerial in October of this year and co -sponsoring of the 
communication and joint statement led by the European Union are s ome of the more visible 
contributions. But I would like to highlight the most imminent challenge that Members should focus 
on.  
 
Members might have different diagnoses and prescriptions for the WTO. There will be many stumbling 
blocks in modernising the WT O, but to lose the WTO dispute settlement system with more than 20 
years of operation would mean losing the last bastion as well as an invaluable tradition that supports 
the rules -based multilateral trading system.  
 
Whether or not the WTO will regain its r elevance is gathering more and more attention from around 
the world including the attention of our leaders. To quote, "the necessary reform of the WTO to 
improve its functioning" was supported by the leaders at the recent G20 Summit. We must make good 
use of every opportunity we have such as the Davos Forum to be held next January to take stock of 
the progress and to imbue more political will and momentum into the relevant process here in Geneva.  
 
Korea has greatly benefitted from the multilateral trading system in becoming and staying one of the 
major partners. Therefore, without doubt, Korea will continue to play an active and constructive role 
in this process with a realistic, pragmatic, and balanced approach in mind.  
 
In conclusion, I would like to remi nd everyone that we are not just living the "Life after Buenos Aires" 
but that we are working towards shaping the "Life after Astana." There is a lot of work awaiting us 
going forward. Let us continue this momentum of active engagement and interaction to w ork our ways 
forward, together.  
 
25. Mexico  
 
The crisis of international trade tensions and escalating trade restrictions that we are currently 
experiencing places us at a critical juncture where the actions that we take, or fail to take, will not 
only affect this organization as an institution, but will also have a serious impact on the certainty 
surrounding future trade flows.  
 
With regard to our organization, we share your view that the agreements reached in Argentina a few 
days ago are a recognition of the need to reform the WTO on the part of G20 leaders and an expression 
of their support. We must act on this call for reform and start working in various configurations towards 
the ultimate goal of achieving a better and more efficient WTO.  
 
The events in Ott awa, which have been reported to us by the delegation of Canada, were the start of 
an exercise in which discussions can take place in a constructive environment, but also a 
demonstration of concern for the health of this institution. It is clear that these  discussions should 
eventually be continued in a broader configuration.  
 
The transparency proposal that was recently introduced by a group of Members, and is now being 
discussed at the level of the Council for Trade in Goods, is intended to address the nee d to improve 
the way in which we monitor compliance with commitments assumed, including the commitment to 
review notification processes and technical assistance.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 84 - 
 
  For Mexico, it is also of paramount importance that we have tools that enable us to verify no t only 
that commitments are being met, but also that responses are being provided to clarifications requested 
in respect of information contained in notifications.  
 
A frank discussion that brings an improvement in this area should be of utmost importance t o the 
entire Membership. Not only will this build trust between trading partners, but it will help to create the 
climate of certainty that is key to promoting trade flows.  
 
We must also remember that rules are of little or no value if they are not subject to a dispute 
settlement mechanism that is effective at all levels.  
 
Although the situation of the Appellate Body is becoming increasingly critical and requires urgent 
resolution, we are now at a point where a group of Members, which includes Mexico, have i ntroduced 
a proposal to resolve the impasse affecting this important body. Here I am referring not just to the 
joint proposal to immediately begin the process of filling vacancies in the Appellate Body, which has 
the support of 71 Members and has been pres ented to the Dispute Settlement Body twenty times, but 
also to the proposal that will be discussed by the Council for Trade in Goods next Wednesday, which 
seeks to address the concerns of a certain Member in a constructive manner, while at the same time 
proposing that we start the process of filling the four vacancies on the Appellate Body.  
 
We call on Members to demonstrate a constructive engagement that allows us to steer this discussion 
rapidly towards the identification of solutions, and thus to safegua rd what was once the jewel in the 
crown of the system. We for our part reiterate our readiness to continue working resolutely and 
tirelessly for the health of our multilateral trading system, including all levels of its dispute settlement 
mechanism.  
 
As regards the negotiating arm, we view the developments observed in some of the negotiating groups 
as very positive.  
 
Firstly, we wish to highlight the vigour that has been injected into the programme proposed in the 
CoA SS, with the aim of achieving a broader  exchange of information, ideas and proposals that enables 
us to move forward in these discussions. At the same time, it is important that we let the substance 
dictate the pace at which we advance.  
 
With regard to services, the discussions on the proposal put forward by Chile, Mexico, New Zealand 
and Panama seem to us to be important, with a view to initiating a dialogue on market access that 
helps us to understand Members' sensitivities and interests. While some Members' concerns are clear, 
we are convince d that exchanging information is key, and a first step towards achieving a better 
understanding of the situation in which we find ourselves.  
 
In relation to fisheries subsidies, we have reached the end of a year of very intensive discussions. It 
is importa nt that we redouble our efforts if we are to meet the deadline specified in Sustainable 
Development Goal 14.6 and deliver on the Buenos Aires Ministerial mandate. For this reason, we 
welcome the fact that we have a work programme for the next six months, w hich will begin in the 
second half of January.  
 
Lastly, the participation and involvement of Members in discussions on joint initiatives have been 
outstanding. We expect next year to be decisive in our search for ways in which to continue the 
discussion and possible negotiation of such initiatives.  
 
We are in an unprecedented situation. On one hand, we have the opportunity to reform this 
organization and make it more efficient, but, at the same time, we run the risk of setting the 
organization back thirty  years. We must be ready to take the right decisions which enable us to rise 
to the challenges that circumstances are placing in our way, and to modernise the WTO while 
preserving the strength of its dispute settlement mechanism. Mexico is certainly ready.  
 
26. Japan  
 
At this intervention, allow me to start by touching upon the many reports pointing out increasing 
uncertainty in the global economy, including the WTO's Twentieth Monitoring Report on G20 Trade 
Measures, released on 22 November. These reports have  stressed that it is the recent proliferation of 
trade -restrictive actions that have been the cause of this increasing uncertainty. In today’s global WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 85 - 
 
  economy of highly developed cross -border supply chains, the reports also point out that such 
measures nega tively impact jobs and economic growth not only for the relevant Members, but for all 
Members. Japan hereby would like to express its strong concern about the current situation 
surrounding international trade, and reiterates that all trade measures taken b y Members should be 
consistent with the WTO Agreement.  
 
At the October TNC/HoDs meeting, Japan stressed that the key question is not whether to reform the 
WTO, but how to reform the WTO. In this vein, I am pleased to note that the G20 leaders have agreed 
on supporting the necessary reform of the WTO to improve its functioning in their declaration at 
Buenos Aires. The next G20 summit will be held in June 2019 in Japan. And as mentioned in the 
declaration, we will have to review the progress made since Bueno s Aires at the next G20 Summit. 
Japan intends to further contribute to the discussions on the WTO reform in this context. It is 
encouraging that, in Geneva, more and more Members share a sense of crisis about the current 
situation of international trade, a nd support the need to improve the functioning of our institution.  
 
To promote WTO reform, a pragmatic approach is indispensable so that Members can start discussions 
issue by issue and work on solutions wherever possible. As part of our efforts to further  strengthen 
the functioning of the WTO, in collaboration with the United States, the European Union and other co -
sponsors, we submitted a proposal on strengthening the implementation of the current notification 
obligation of the WTO Agreements at the CTG i n November. Japan, together with the other co -
sponsors, continues to make further efforts to get all the Members on board in the run up to the next 
CTG in April, with a view to revising the proposal based on the opinions and concerns expressed at 
the meeti ng. We look forward to continuing to advance the work with all the Members. Japan also 
appreciates the Canada -led reform initiative in this regard.  
 
Japan would also like to point out that positive progress has been made in other areas. Japan welcomes 
the active discussion conducted this year on fisheries subsidies, and will contribute further to the 
efforts to meet the deadline for agreement by the end of next year. Japan also expects to see 
constructive deliberations in other areas as well.  
 
Regarding th e Joint Statement Initiatives, we are encouraged by the progress in the area of e -
commerce and domestic regulation on services among others. We have also had constructive 
discussions on possible elements to be included in the e -commerce disciplines this ye ar. Japan expects 
that progress toward the WTO negotiations will be made next year, and that those efforts will 
complement the 1998 Work Programme on E -Commerce and contribute to reinvigorating it. Japan will 
make every effort to continue to ensure transpa rency and inclusiveness in its promotion of the Joint 
Statement Initiatives.  
 
Let me next briefly turn to the WTO dispute settlement system. In many senses, the dispute settlement 
system is now in crisis. Different Members have different understandings of  current situations, and 
their prescriptions differ accordingly. However, one thing is certain: responsible WTO Members must 
act now to address the challenges facing the system, including the Appellate Body. Solution -focused 
dialogues are essential in this  endeavour. Japan recalls that the proposals have been tabled for the 
upcoming General Council meeting. Japan welcomes these solution -oriented initiatives and will 
proactively engage in the WTO Members' common efforts to restore and improve the proper 
functioning of the dispute settlement system, and looks forward to working with any interested 
Members, including the United States, to this end.  
 
Before concluding my statement, I would like to briefly share our thoughts on the Director -General's 
call in Octo ber for improving the TNC/HoDs meeting. Japan supports the idea of setting a specific time 
limit on Members' statements. We agree that it would be helpful to look at practices in other meetings 
such as the TPRs. Japan also supports the idea of making meeti ngs more interactive, and would like 
to explore possible ideas for how to do so with other Members. A Member -driven approach remains 
crucial for addressing those many pending issues before us. At the same time, Japan would appreciate 
initiatives from the D irector -General and stands ready to contribute proactively to supporting such 
efforts.  
 
27. Indonesia (G -33) 
 
First of all, I wish to thank the Director -General for convening this meeting as well as for updating 
Members with information of his recent activitie s and assessment on current situation. I wish also to WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 86 - 
 
  thank various Chairs of Negotiating Groups for providing Members with the state of play of discussion 
in the respective negotiating areas.  
 
On behalf of the G -33, I would like to reiterate the Group's views, that in the absence of concrete 
outcomes and clear political guidance from Buenos Aires, Members must continue their work based 
on Article 20 of the Agreement on Agriculture and existing m andates in the Bali, Nairobi and preceding 
Ministerial Decisions/Declarations.  
 
The G -33 would also like to reaffirm its views that an accessible and effective price and volume – 
based Special Safeguard Mechanism and a permanent solution for Public Stockh olding for food security 
purposes for developing Members remain to be priorities for the Group in the context of the next 
Ministerial Conference deliverables.  
 
Those policy instruments are critical for majority of developing Members and LDCs in this House  to 
address persistent problems related to food security, livelihood security and rural development. The 
need to deliver them in Astana is now becoming more pressing as the level of food insecurity in many 
developing countries and LDCs are increasing due t o negative impacts of climate change. Those policy 
instruments are also needed to help developing Members in attaining relevant goals under SDG 2030.  
 
In this regard, the G -33 welcomes the intensification of discussions next year through formation of 
several Member -led working groups on various topics in the Agriculture negotiations. As the proponent 
of the PSH and SSM, the G -33 looks forward to seeing Members' constructive engagement in this 
process with a view to find agreed solutions for both issues as per mandate.   
 
The G -33 remains committed to constructively engage in any process deemed necessary to move the 
negotiation forward.   
 
28. Indonesia  
 
Firstly, Indonesia would like to associate itself to the statement made by the delegation of Singapore 
on beh alf of ASEAN member countries.  
 
Indonesia continues to urge all Members to intensify work in addressing various fundamental issues 
confronted by the WTO. After Buenos Aires, Indonesia has been following with concern the evolving 
developments that have hin dered the multilateral trading system from working properly, such as 
Member's continued divergent views on how we continue our work in the negotiating areas, increasing 
unilateralism that is now unfolding in WTO disputes and continued impasse in the select ion process of 
Appellate Body members.  
 
Indonesia would like to reiterate its views that it is Member's collective responsibility to address those 
challenges with the sense of urgency, to safeguard an open, predictable and rules -based multilateral 
trading  system in the WTO. Despite lack of political guidance from Buenos Aires and the current 
uncertain political environment, work in Geneva shall continue and Members need to translate their 
political will into more concrete work.  
 
In continuing their work, Members shall immediately take up unfinished work from Bali, Nairobi and 
Buenos Aires based on existing mandates and progress achieved so far. Indonesia also believes that 
incremental and pragmatic approach remain to be our working principles.  
 
Allow me n ow to offer Indonesia's views on some important issues, and how we can make progress.   
 
On Agriculture, while fully supporting the G -33's views on PSH and SSM, Indonesia welcomes 
Members' contributions on several important issues. They reflect Members' gr eat interest to move the 
Agriculture negotiations forward. While welcoming those submissions, however, Indonesia is of the 
view that any initiative shall be directed to address imbalances and inequities inherited from the 
Uruguay Round and specific needs o f developing and least -developed country Members.      
 
On Fisheries Subsidies, we would like to recall the mandate which was agreed at Buenos Aires to 
engage constructively in the fisheries subsidies negotiations, with a view to adopting an agreement 
on comprehensive and effective disciplines that will prohibit certain forms of fisheries subsidies which 
contributes to overcapacity and overfishing, also eliminating subsidies that contribute to IUU fishing.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 87 - 
 
  On this issue, we are of the view that special attention needs to be given to address appropriate and 
effective special and differential treatment for developing country Members and least -developed 
country Members. Different levels of development among WTO Members will have significant effect 
towards t he implementation and success of the future discipline. Thus, we believe special and 
differential treatment must become an integral part of the negotiations.  
 
As we have just completed the text -based discussion for the September to December cluster, we 
would like to thank Ambassador Zapata and the Secretariat for their efforts in organising our work 
programme for 2019. We welcome the work programme for the first half of 2019 and as we are going 
to enter the next phase of the fisheries negotiations, we would  like to encourage Members to uphold 
the spirit of cooperation and flexibility.  
 
On development issues, Indonesia reaffirms its views that development elements have been integral 
parts of various WTO Agreements, with a view to, among others, assisting deve loping and LDC 
Members to reap equitable benefits from the multilateral trading system. In this regard, Indonesia is 
of the view that Members need to intensify interaction in an open and more pragmatic manner to find 
agreed solutions.  
 
On the impasse on t he selection of Appellate Body members, Indonesia takes note of the proposals 
that have been put on the table. We commend the efforts to bring all Members to be constructively 
engaged in problem -solving type discussions. In this regard, Indonesia hopes tha t all proposals will 
serve as solid basis for Members to effectively resolve the impasse. It is Members' collective 
responsibility to address this issue with the sense of urgency and in more expeditious manner so as 
to ensure the credibility of multilatera lism in the WTO.  
 
With respect to some "new initiatives", while considering their important role in current economic 
realities, Indonesia continues to uphold its view that Members should keep an open -mind in continuing 
the exploratory nature of the conver sations. Indonesia welcome various submissions by Members. In 
those efforts, however, Members shall continue to uphold open, inclusive and transparent principles 
to ensure no one will be left behind. In this undertaking, Indonesia remains to believe in the  centrality 
of "development" and "special and differential treatment principles".   
 
Finally, Indonesia would like to reiterate its readiness to be actively and constructively engaged in any 
necessary process, particularly in finding acceptable solutions t hat will address everybody's interest 
and concerns.  
 
29. India  
 
We thank the Director -General for convening this informal meeting of the TNC and for his report and 
assessment as the Chairman of the TNC. We also thank the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for th eir 
reports.   
 
India associates itself with the statement made by Indonesia on behalf of the G -33.  
 
State of Play  
 
Clouds have been hanging over Geneva in the week leading to this last General Council meeting of 
2018. But the darkness outside is nothing compared to the gloom that shrouds the WTO. Today, we 
see more protectionist measures in a year than at any time in the recent past, more dispute panels 
being set up in a period of thirty days than in the whole year 2017 and a spate of unilateral measures 
and counter measures amidst escalating trade tensions. Further, time is running out for the Appellate 
Body. These issues, if left unaddressed, will sound the death knell of the rules -based, multilateral 
trading system, as we have known it for the last two decades, and which we cherish.   
 
In this grim environment, let me share some candid thoughts.  
 
On Reforms  
 
The main discourse today at the WTO is centred around reforms. Members in different geometries and 
configurations have been discussing them. Many country groupings, including the leaders of the G20, 
believe that the WTO needs to be reformed to improve its functioning. The often -heard cliché is "reform 
should take everybody along". At the same time, the papers on the table appear to be lopsided with WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 88 - 
 
  the potential to increase divergences. If this trend continues, there would be limited chances of 
possible agr eement amongst Members. While we are willing to engage on reform proposals, we would 
like to caution that a balance and inclusiveness will be critical to success in this area.  
 
Coming to the Appellate Body  
 
The one, small silver lining seems to be some su ggestions in the form of concrete, textual proposals 
to address the Appellate Body impasse. Addressing specific problems related to the Appellate Body, 
while protecting its independence, presents a window of opportunity to break the logjam. We have 
co-sponsored two such proposals with the hope that they will provoke active engagement, discussion 
on specifics and development of possible solutions. It is our view that a pragmatic approach demands 
that we try to address the problems facing the WTO sequentially , and in steps. Finding a way to 
preserve the dispute settlement system while trying to improve it, should be the first, and foremost 
step in the direction of protecting our rules -based system of multilateral trade. Without an effective 
system of enforceme nt of rules, the appetite for new rules or reforms will, at best, be very limited.  
 
As far as the Negotiating Agenda is concerned  
 
We have about 18 months to the Twelfth Ministerial Conference, and to craft a package in the 
negotiating forum which has som ething for everyone. However, we should not be sanguine, as time 
will fly like the last twelve months since Buenos Aires have passed. Mandated issues in agriculture like 
Public Stockholding for Food Security for all developing countries and LDCs, fisheries  and services 
need to be taken forward with a sense of focus. We need to build on the work done in the last many 
years. India, along with others, has made a number of proposals in the CoA SS on issues like domestic 
support, public stockholding and SSM and we are actively participating in fisheries subsidies 
negotiations. These underline our efforts to take the negotiating agenda forward, in areas where 
decisions leading to reform, including of the Agreement on Agriculture, are long overdue.   
 
Many lament t he need for focusing on regular work of WTO  
 
On our part, we are committed to working towards better utilisation of the regular bodies of the WTO 
in the multilateral format. Our proposal on understanding the e -commerce moratorium in the General 
Council, in  so far as it impacts Members' policy space to protect domestic industry and government 
revenue is an important initiative in this direction. Further, we have, in the WPDR, made a proposal 
on domestic regulations for Mode 4 relating to the movement of prof essionals, their entry and 
presence. Our proposal was discussed during the meeting of the WPDR on 5 December. Several 
Members and groups supported the proposal and expressed interest to work on issues of interest for 
developing countries, with priority on development. Going forward, we will continue to engage with 
the Membership to develop commercially meaningful rules to facilitate Mode 4, as per mandate of 
GATS Article VI:4.   
 
What then is the way forward?  
 
We believe that it is important to implement va rious mandates from previous Ministerial Conferences 
in a fair and urgent manner, and without cherry picking, to harvest a basket of outcomes at Astana.  
On the other hand, if decisions of one Ministerial are not implemented, the moral pressure on executin g 
others gets automatically reduced. Further, in addition to preserving and improving the dispute 
settlement system, we need to be clear that principles that we hold dear, like abjuring protectionism 
and unilateral measures, non -discrimination among Member s, preserving special and differential 
treatment for all developing countries and LDCs, should inform the way forward for the WTO. We also 
need to urgently address the asymmetries in Uruguay Round agreements, particularly the Agreement 
on Agriculture and a lso move forward on fisheries subsidies disciplines, an issue that is part of the 
Doha mandate.  
 
30. Argentina  
 
There are several issues that I wish to raise at this meeting, but not before thanking the Director -
General and the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups  for their status reports on the work of this 
organization. We would like to express our appreciation for the tireless work in which the coordinators 
of the Joint Initiatives have been engaged throughout the year.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 89 - 
 
  I would first like to place this statemen t in the current context, given that we are facing a number of 
problems in world trade. In this connection, I have to mention the successful G20 Leaders' Summit 
held in Buenos Aires on 30 November and 1 December. The title of the declaration reflected the theme 
that Argentina espoused for its Presidency: "Building consensus for fair and sustainable development".  
 
The 31 paragraphs of the declaration address a wide range of current and future issues of key 
importance for an agenda "that is people -centred, in clusive and forward -looking": transformative 
technologies, the future of work, access to education, digitalization, infrastructure, food security, 
gender equality, resources and the financial system, health, climate change, refugees, sustainable 
developmen t, the role of energy, corruption and terrorism, among others.  
 
Clearly, and without prejudice to the multiple and complex interactions between each of the 
aforementioned issues, paragraph 27 concerns us directly. In this paragraph, the G20 leaders 
underscore the importance of international trade and investment as engines of growth, innovation, 
job creation and development. They also recognise the contribution that the multilateral trading 
system can make to this end. The declaration does of course s upport the necessary reform of the WTO 
to improve its functioning. Moreover, these ideas are expressed in the first -person plural – a format 
not used throughout the declaration – to creatively reinforce this message.  
 
The G20 was able to open up a path of dialogue that could lead to consensus on a broad range of 
issues, without exclusion. We think this leaves us no excuse for pursuing a much narrower – though 
undoubtedly more precise – agenda.  
 
On another note, I would like to refer briefly to the proposal on transparency and notifications, co -
sponsored by Argentina, together with the United States, the European Union, Japan, Australia, Costa 
Rica and Chinese Taipei. The diagnosis and its implications have been expounded in detail, reflecting 
the imperative need for action. Remaining passive would imply consent for non -compliance with basic 
principles. We therefore call on Members to join forces and support the proposal.  
 
Nobody is saying that there can be consensus without challenges. Rather, it is these cha llenges that 
will ultimately give the consensus its real added value. This consensus should be preserved, 
safeguarded and used always in the spirit that inspires it, that is, for a constructive objective.  
 
We reiterate our country's willingness to work in a constructive and inclusive manner on the necessary 
initiatives that will enable this organization to continue playing a key role in multilateral economic 
relations. To this end, it is vital that the Organization functions effectively in the three pillars  of trade.  
 
This leads me to another point that I wish to raise. We note with regret that there has been no change 
in the situation of the Appellate Body and that, as of tomorrow, 11 December, three vacancies will 
have remained unfilled for a year.  
 
The ag enda for the next General Council meeting includes two items on this subject and three written 
communications. While improvements are possible in some cases, we trust that these may mark the 
start of the dialogue that brings solutions satisfactory to all p arties.  
 
The G20 Summit not only provided an opportunity to focus on the multilateral trading system but also 
gave us renewed hope that, bilaterally, various countries might begin to resolve their differences.  
 
All our countries, despite our many varied na mes and forms, have a judicial authority and a supreme 
court of justice. The cornerstone of the justice system is its "judicial authority". Without justice, there 
is no order. Without justice, there is no progress.  
 
Thus, we cannot ignore the need for this  "judicial authority" to be efficient, effective, balanced, fair, 
neutral, impartial and objective, and to display each of these aspects in adequate measure and on a 
timely basis. We must make this point clearly: while some of these aspects are in place to day, we 
trust that constructive debate and discussion will ultimately build the ideal mechanism that we all wish 
to see. Then we will be able to count on a body of unquestionable solidity whose future is fully 
guaranteed.  
 
While almost everyone is talking about the trade war, it is time to start preaching peace in all forms 
of trade. This requires, above all else, balance. Cooperation is vital to achieve such balance, and this WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 90 - 
 
  cooperation will bring us peace. We are therefore calling for the start of a new era: the era of trade 
peace.  
 
We do this recalling that, today more than ever, a war is won by the side that loses least, not by the 
side that loses nothing.  
 
31. Chinese Taipei  
 
At the outset, I would like to express our appreciation to the Director -General for his continuing efforts 
in safeguarding the system in these difficult times.  
 
Looking ahead to the coming year, it is evident that the two most pressing issues that remain, and 
which have to be tackled, will be the WTO's continuing relevance to the worl d, which is itself 
undergoing a major transformation and, of course, the ongoing impasse in the selection of Appellate 
Body members.  
  
We are committed to working towards the reforms needed by the WTO for it to carry out its primary 
role of ensuring a leve l playing -field and fair trade for all its Members. Indeed, we believe it is in every 
Member's interest to achieve that by taking action to strengthen and modernise this organization. In 
our view, it is time to have an open and frank discussion on these cr itical issues, in order to gather 
and reflect on the inclusive views of the WTO Membership as a whole.  
 
Having said this, we also support the Chair's idea put forward at the last TNC Meeting in October, 
which should be developed in parallel.  
 
Turning to th e subject of transparency, we believe that this too is a critically important element of the 
WTO's multilateral trading system. As one of the co -sponsors of the proposal on this, we have been 
reflecting recently on Members' comments, and revising the propo sal accordingly. We stand ready to 
engage other Members to advance this proposal.  
 
As regards the fisheries subsidies negotiations, my delegation will work closely with the Chair, 
Ambassador Zapata, to implement our work programme, and remain committed to engage in all the 
forms of and configuration of negotiations which may hopefully lead us to a satisfactory result by the 
end of next year.  
 
We also continue to work with other Members on a number of "joint initiatives" on such topics as e -
commerce, domesti c regulation, MSMEs, and women's empowerment, and we are pleased to see the 
progress made so far.  
 
With respect to e -commerce, we strongly believe that the WTO has an important role to play, and, 
therefore, are encouraged by the broader participation and i nterests. Clearly, e -commerce is an issue 
to demonstrate WTO's relevance to the world. We are of the view that we need to move to a more 
concrete phase and look forward to delivering a doable, highly ambitious and balanced outcome, aimed 
at establishing a framework of free and fair e -commerce, and digital trade.  
 
32. Uganda  
 
My delegation thanks the Director -General for his extensive and comprehensive report. The Chairs of 
the Negotiating Groups are also commended for their reports on the progress made, if any,  throughout 
the year.  
 
At the outset, my delegation associates itself with the statements made by the Republic of South 
Africa on behalf of the African Group, Central African Republic on behalf of the LDC Group and the 
Republic of Malawi on behalf of the ACP Group.  
 
Allow me to start by stating the obvious. By agreement, resolution and declaration, some countries, 
currently 47 were labelled by the United Nations Organization as Least -Developed Counties and they 
are members of that multilateral system. Out  of that number, 36 are respectively Members and/or 
Observers of this multilateral trading system – the WTO. Why have we, members of the so called 
Least -Developed Countries, joined this august organization. First and foremost, it is because of the 
great be nefits which we envisage can be derived from being Members of this multilateral trading 
system. Secondly, it is somewhat for protection when we play trading games on the understanding WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 91 - 
 
  that the field is level. WTO is a rule -making organization and all Membe rs are expected to play by the 
rules.  
 
The foundation of and the framework within which the Least -Developed Countries are to benefit from 
the WTO is ingrained in the Doha Mandates. It therefore follows that the Doha round and all that 
comes with it includi ng the very important decisions of our Ministers at their meetings through the 
years and promises made cannot simply be wished away. All provisions under the Doha Development 
Agenda where Member countries are meant to derive benefits from must be fully con formed to and 
decisions made thereunder must be implemented.  
 
Agenda 2030 on Sustainable Development Goals calls for the conclusion of the Doha round in SDG 
17.10. In this regard, and in line with paragraph 34 of the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration, Minist ers 
concurred that we should prioritise work where results have not yet been achieved. SDG 17.10 calls 
for the promotion of a universal, rules -based, open, non -discriminatory and equitable multilateral 
trading system under the WTO, and calls for the conclu sion of negotiations within its Doha 
Development Agenda.  
 
What is our score in this regard at the close of yet another year? Have we failed to conclude yet 
another round for LDCs? Are we going to shy away again from undertaking our obligations towards 
LDC interests?  
 
For my delegation, the DDA enshrines much of what we aspire for in the multilateral trading system, 
and our current and future engagement remains anchored in the DDA until such time when the round 
is concluded as stipulated in paragraph 45 of t he Doha Declaration. Towards that end therefore, we 
support the conclusion of the remaining elements of the Doha round not only in line with the object, 
purpose and spirit of the SDGs, but also of the DDA.  
 
Specifically on agriculture, which is the backbon e of Uganda's economy, employing 70% of the 
population, and contributing to half of Uganda's export earnings and a quarter of the country's gross 
domestic product, it is extremely disappointing that to -date there has been no meaningful outcome 
from the neg otiations. I would like to assure the Director -General that we shall not relent. My 
delegation will continue to stress especially the need for the substantial reduction of trade -distorting 
domestic support, and insist on a permanent solution for public sto ckholding for food security 
purposes, and also a special safeguard mechanism.  
 
My parents used the money from sale of cotton to pay for my education when things were good then. 
We continue to urge all Members to address the issue of trade -distorting subsid ies for cotton 
production considering the vital importance of cotton to development in countries like mine.  
 
Let me turn to the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. We thank India and South Africa for 
their submission on the need to rethink the moratoriu m on customs duties on electronic transmissions.  
With the Universal Parcel Services forecast reading that the average annual growth rate of cross border 
e-commerce is expected to outstrip that of the global GDP in the period 2013 to 2020, the implications  
of the moratorium for us are of fundamental importance. It is indeed for this reason that my delegation 
is gravely concerned about the parallel process being undertaken on e -commerce. It needs no brainer 
that this process has sucked the life out of the 19 98 Work Programme on Electronic Commerce. Worse 
still, the discussions are being pursued on clearly contrary terms to those mandated in the Work 
Programme. It could indeed be right to suggest that some Members are only interested in the portions 
of the Wor k Programme in which case deeper reflection on the way forward may be needed.  
 
On technical cooperation and capacity building, my delegation wishes to thank the Institute for 
Training and Technical Cooperation for the support given to officials from Uganda  to participate in the 
various training activities throughout the year. It has not only helped our officials to enhance their 
knowledge in the different fields of specialization, but it has also enabled our institutions to utilise the 
opportunities that th e multilateral trading system presents for the benefit of our citizenry.  
 
There are other LDC issues for which we urge Members to continue pursuing for full implementation 
of all decisions in favour of LDCs such as decision on DFQF and the LDCs services wa iver decision. We 
wish to appreciate Members for their continued support towards the operationalization of the waiver. 
We especially welcome the recent agreement reached in the Council for Trade in Services to hold a 
dedicated session to initiate a process  of review of operation of notified preferences.  
   WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 92 - 
 
  With regard to Special and Differential Treatment, we stress that any attempts to alter or sidestep the 
paragraph 44 Doha mandate in the CTD SS are unacceptable. Any proposals outside this mandate are 
diversionary and will not enjoy the support of my delegation.  
 
On Fisheries, my delegation welcomes the efforts that Members have made throughout the year and 
hope that all the hard work will be rewarded through reaching an agreement on the relevant 
discipli nes. We only wish to add that the circumstances of LDCs must be taken into account and to 
stress once again that the efforts we are witnessing in fisheries discussions should be replicated in all 
areas of work of this organization as mandated by our Minist ers. 
 
Turning to the issue of the dispute settlement system of this great organization, it is astonishing that 
the one principle that some Members are trying to undermine in other areas is the very principle 
allowing a Member to hold all other Members at r ansom. We cannot imagine that the WTO will have 
one of its three main pillars rendered completely ineffective.  
 
The WTO is a multilateral organization and we acknowledge that consensus is the principle of decision -
making. It is very unfortunate that we ha ve witnessed a blatant selective disregard of this fundamental 
principle. Earlier this year, we cautioned against Members undermining multilateralism through 
dubious actions. We would like to stress today first, that the ongoing isolationist actions being pursued 
by members in this organization are inconsistent with the Article III (2) of the Marrakesh Agreement. 
Secondly, that it is utterly ridiculous to suggest that plurilateral arrangements should be the substitute 
in a multilateral organization.  
 
Member s must carefully reflect upon the implications of the changes they are seeking to bring to this 
organization in the immediate term and the manner in which they are being brought. Until such time 
as all Members agree to change the rules, the existing rules must be respected by all. Otherwise all 
meaning of, and the essence of rules will be lost leading inevitably to chaos. Members should also 
reflect on their very important commitment not to leave anyone behind.  
 
We shall repeat what we have said before. Wha t is the essence of making new rules when the 
enforcement mechanism of the existing rules is in shambles? We urge the Members concerned to 
come forward with proposals of what they wish to see, for it is from such engagement that a solution 
will be forged.  
 
For my delegation, we are determined to intensify efforts to overcome the challenges of the moment 
well knowing the reward we shall get. The multilateral trading system has benefited many Members 
over the years and it is only fitting that all is done to preserve and strengthen it and not undermine 
it. With open mind, we are carefully studying the ideas being advanced relating to flexible 
multilateralism and open plulateralism, but they appear to be a depiction of giving up on the system 
that has served ma ny so well over the years. We strongly urge all Members to desist from this. Let 
the need and desire for reform of this organization be driven by genuine needs and not by our 
impatience to resolve the differences in opinion on issues, however deep they are . 
 
33. Philippines  
 
At the outset, the Philippines associates itself with the statement of ASEAN as delivered by Singapore 
and the G -33 statement as delivered by Indonesia.  
 
My delegation extends our appreciation to the Director -General and to the Chairs of all Negotiating 
Groups for their patience, commitment, and hard work this year in advancing progress on all 
negotiating issues. Although we still have a long way to go to MC12, through your collective efforts 
and leadership this year, I believe that we can  now have something to build on as we intensify our 
work next year.  
 
Specifically, on fisheries rules, as guided by the steady hand of Ambassador Zapata of Mexico, we are 
grateful that we now have a clear roadmap on the work to be accelerated in 2019. The Philippines 
remains guided firstly by the Buenos Aires mandate to complete the negotiations by 2019, and 
secondly the SDG 14.6 mandate, calling for a pragmatic multilateral outcome by 2020 on fisheries 
subsidies.  
 
In CoA SS, we still face a difficult road ahead. But this year, Ambassador Ford of Guyana has injected 
a much -needed analytical and problem -solving approach to understanding the fundamental issues WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 93 - 
 
  that have deadlocked the Membership on all areas of the agriculture negotiations, particularly focusi ng 
on domestic support, public stockholding, and the SSM. While we welcome this intensified technical 
and evidence -based approach, political will is still needed to build on this work and to generate greater 
momentum in 2019 towards a Ministerial outcome i n MC12.  
 
The Philippines would also like to note, with appreciation, the substantial output of the various MC11 
Joint Statement Initiatives, specifically on MSMEs, electronic commerce, and investment facilitation. 
We thank all the coordinators for their up dates. My delegation has learned much from the sharing of 
experiences, best practices, and insights on specific issues that could shape the contours of a possible 
framework for future multilateral rulemaking. As the Membership reengages on these Joint Stat ement 
Initiatives, the Philippines is keen to participate in any process that would fully and genuinely 
multilaterali ze these discussions in an inclusive and transparent manner.  
 
There is no denying that the multilateral trading system faces a serious — even existential — threat 
today. It is within our collective competence to find the appropriate solution to improve, preserve, and 
strengthen the system. One of these solutions is right in front of us — achieving multilateral outcomes 
on all negotiating issu es on the table, particularly those covered by Ministerial mandates including the 
DDA. That task will nevertheless require political will, a readiness to transcend legitimate national 
interests, and a clear focus on the long -term.  
 
34. Jamaica  
 
We thank the Di rector -General for his Report and also wish to extend our appreciation to the Chairs 
of the various Negotiating Groups for the reports on their work.  
 
Jamaica would also like to express its support for the statements made by Vanuatu on behalf of the 
ACP Gr oup, Indonesia on behalf of the G -33 and that to be made by Haiti on behalf of CARICOM.  
 
Background  
 
Jamaica continues to take stock of the worrying developments within the multilateral trading system. 
We remain concerned over the systemic risks that these  developments continue to pose to the 
functioning of the WTO.  
 
We are confronted by our inability to timely facilitate redress to broader systemic issues that have 
arisen. Further, our reticence in invoking the cardinal principles of inclusivity and transp arency in 
respect of how we move forward is a cause for concern among small and vulnerable economies, like 
Jamaica, whose development objectives have been predicated on the effectiveness of an open, 
transparent, inclusive and rules -based multilateral tradi ng system.  
 
While we acknowledge that it may be early days yet, we are of the view that our efforts to agree a set 
of mutually satisfactory arrangements that resolve current challenges, maintain the organization's 
core deliverables and bestow added benefi ts on the entire WTO Membership will become complicated 
if we do not employ an inclusive and transparent approach.   
 
Ownership of changes must be engendered if those changes are to be sustainable, or indeed, accepted.  
 
In that connection, as the initiatives on reform are being studied in Kingston, clarity on the leadership 
and direction of the process, as well as information on the planned formats of engagement that 
preserve the integrity of the multilateral trading syst em, would assist those discussions.    
 
Trade tensions  
 
Jamaica wishes to reaffirm the high level of which importance it attaches to the preservation of the 
multilateral trading system, as trade remains the key pathway to our country's pursuit of economic 
growth, job creation and national development. We cautiously welcome what appears to be 
encouraging signs of engagement to contain trade tensions and, thereby, manage the destabilising 
effects that such tensions may have across the global trading system, i ncluding risks to the trade and 
development prospects of other countries which were not intended. This is especially the reality for 
small and vulnerable economies, like Jamaica.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 94 - 
 
  Appellate Body Impasse  
 
As regards the current impasse over Appellate Body appointments, Jamaica, like all Members, 
continues to recognise the vital role played by the dispute settlement mechanism within the WTO. 
Jamaica therefore urges the WTO's membership to accord priority to the prompt filling of these 
vacancies. In that conn ection, we recognise ongoing discussions in the DSB, including in its special 
session, with a view to solutions aimed at limiting further negative systemic impact.  
 
We commend those WTO Members who have presented proposals and have advanced ideas to resol ve 
the impasse and to streamline the modus operandi of the mechanism. An independent, impartial, 
efficient and transparent dispute settlement mechanism that facilitates well -reasoned, objective and 
fair decisions benefits all Members, including those who a re less frequent participants in adjudication 
proceedings. Jamaica remains ready to constructively engage in initiatives that contribute to the 
process.  
 
Transparency and Notifications  
 
On the matter of transparency and compliance with notification obligat ions Jamaica wishes to recall 
the meeting of the CTG on 12 November at which all Members who took the floor, including Jamaica, 
acknowledged the importance of improving compliance with their notification obligations in the WTO. 
While Jamaica reaffirms its commitment to initiatives aimed at improving Members' notification 
compliance, we cannot endorse the adoption of an authoritative approach to addressing the issue.  
 
There is need for a greater understanding of the capacity constraints faced by developing countries 
and LDCs, which vary from country to country and from issue to issue. We would therefore recommend 
that Members begin their reflection by mandating the completion of a comprehensive report or audit, 
the Terms of Reference for which would be devel oped by Members, on the notification challenges faced 
by the WTO, including a detailed look at, inter alia, the extent to which capacity is a factor, whether 
the Secretariat's TACB facilities require further re -calibration, and whether existing notificatio n 
requirements, such as coverage, details and frequency, are unnecessarily onerous for developing 
countries and LDCs. This should then be presented to the appropriate Committee in a dedicated 
session for an analysis and discussion, with a view to generatin g appropriate recommendations based 
on the findings. This approach would, undoubtedly be more palatable that a resort to establishing 
provisions linked to punitive measures, an approach to which most Members have indicated they would 
not agree.  
 
Doha Nego tiations  
 
In respect of the Doha Declaration, we take this opportunity to re -emphasise the importance of 
arriving at an outcome on Fisheries Subsidies by December 2019, in accordance with the mandate 
issued by Ministers in Buenos Aires. We take note of the  Chair's communication on the Work 
Programme for the period, January to July 2019, and pledge our support. Jamaica has a strong interest 
in environmental and marine protection and we support the WTO's mandate to implement SDG 14.6. 
Further, Jamaica's parti cipation in the negotiations is with a view to safeguarding the invaluable 
contribution of fisheries to national food and nutrition security, job creation and livelihood.  
 
It is with that in mind that Jamaica calls on the Chair of the Negotiating Group to  ensure that the 
discussions proceed in a manner that avail developing countries and LDCs of the necessary policy 
space to pursue the sustainable management and development of their fisheries industries, including 
the social and economic dimensions of the sector, and does not result in any unintended negative 
impact. Further, an outcome on fisheries subsidies must guarantee coastal states' sovereignty and 
sovereign rights within their maritime space, as enshrined in international law; improved 
competitivene ss and fishing practices; appropriate special and differential treatment for developing 
countries and LDCs. As with other issues, we expect the negotiations to be open, transparent and 
inclusive in order to promote the widest possible ownership of any outc ome. 
 
In the negotiations on Agriculture, we acknowledge the yeoman's efforts of Ambassador Deep Ford to 
lead us to a successful landing at MC12 in Astana. Jamaica is encouraged that dialogue is taking place 
among Members and information and analyses are being p resented to improve our understanding of 
each other's realities. We support the Chair's draft work programme, in particular, the focus on more 
difficult issues in a sub -plenary mode with the assistance of co -coordinators. Here, we also urge him 
to maintain  the principles of transparency, openness, inclusiveness and representativeness in his WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 95 - 
 
  pursuit of an outcome. We also support the continuous evaluation of the process in order to ensure 
that the objectives are being met. We look forward to receiving the re vised work programme 
emanating from contributions made by Members during the CoA SS on 7 December.  
  
Jamaica attaches particular importance to outcomes on PSH, SSM and domestic support, and urges 
more flexibility from all sides, as well as greater empathy with and understanding of the social and 
economic realities that confront the agricultural sector in developing countries and LDCs. Agriculture 
continues to be an essential component of Jamaica's food and nutrition security and has important 
linkages to ot her key sectors within our economy on which we depend for foreign exchange earnings, 
job creation, family welfare, and rural development and transformation.  
 
With the services sector contributing to over 70% of Jamaica's GDP, the negotiations on services a re 
of great import. An outcome in the area of services, including with respect to future work, will provide 
tangible economic benefits for developing countries, like Jamaica, whose economies are either 
dominated by services or are showing potential for gro wth in the services sector. Jamaica continues 
to be disappointed with the pace at which discussions are progressing in the Special Session of the 
Council on Trade in Services. At the same time, we welcome the efforts of the Chair of the CTS SS to 
intensify  the work of the Negotiating Group.  
 
On special and differential treatment, we must deepen and expand our engagements in this very 
critical area. The vital link between trade and development was acknowledged by our Ministers in 
Buenos Aires. We must exerci se creativity, open mindedness, flexibility and a willingness to find 
solutions to the concerns of all Members, particularly those of developing countries and LDCs.  
 
In concluding, the WTO belongs to all its Members. The sense of ownership in respect of th e work of 
this organization risks becoming adulterated if some Members are excluded on the basis of limited 
capacity or views which do not coincide.  
 
Members of the WTO should constructively engage for the benefit of all, including the most vulnerable. 
We must ensure that no Member, whether a small or a large player in the global trade arena, is left 
behind.  
 
35. Senegal  
 
Let me begin by thanking the Director -General and all the Negotiating Group Chairs for their respective 
reports.  
 
Our delegation endorses th e statements made by the various Groups to which our country belongs.  
 
At the end of the Eleventh WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires that took place a year ago, it 
was clear that additional efforts must be made to revive the discussions within this  organization.  
 
MC11 had confirmed the gulf within the organization that separated those in favour of implementing 
the development commitments resulting from Doha under the DDA and those who no longer wished 
to adhere to them.  
 
Divergences also emerged bet ween those who wished to prioritise other questions and those who felt 
that earlier discussions should first be finalised.  
 
In 2018, little progress has been made in the various areas of negotiation and Members have continued 
to reiterate well -known positi ons. 
 
I would like to reiterate Senegal's position on the negotiations and other discussions taking place at 
the WTO. In October, I stated that it was of paramount importance to take into consideration the 
principles and objectives that underpinned our org anization when it was founded in Marrakesh.  
 
Indeed, inclusiveness, consensus and transparency in decision -making are essential components of 
the WTO and have guided the course that it has taken to date.  
 
In Senegal's view, it is not these principles in themselves that have led to the difficulties we are 
currently experiencing. Rather, it is the failure to respect commitments previously assumed that have WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 96 - 
 
  brought us to this impasse. The lack of political wil l to reach consensus on key issues has been a major 
contributor to the stalling of discussions in a number of areas.  
 
This has been detrimental to the most vulnerable Members, and especially the least -developed 
countries, for which many key issues have not  been resolved as anticipated.  
 
In this connection, Senegal would like to reiterate that development, and the integration of developing 
countries and the least -developed countries in international trade and in global value chains, must 
remain at the heart of the multilateral trade negotiations.  
 
My delegation believes that for many developing countries and least -developed countries, tackling 
these priority issues, alongside emerging world trade issues, would be a demonstration of the WTO's 
credibility and r elevance.  
 
Resolving the issue of the appointment of new members of the Appellate Body should also be accorded 
the utmost urgency. Senegal calls on all Members to show greater flexibility in this area.  
 
With regard to the informal work to reform the WTO cu rrently under way, my delegation has taken 
note of the concerns raised by certain Members and would like to state that interests crucial to 
developing countries and the LDCs should be considered as an integral part of the discussions.  
 
I would now like to consider the outlook for 2019. The Negotiating Group on Rules has agreed a work 
programme for the negotiations on fisheries subsidies. Senegal reiterates its commitment to reaching 
an agreement on this work before the next Ministerial Conference. However, these discussions seem 
to be the trees that are hiding the wood. Indeed, the negotiations on fisheries subsidies are one of 
the few areas in which almost all Members are engaged. In other areas, there is more of a sense of 
pessimism. We see no real will to  engage anew in discussions that could lead us to concrete results. 
It is nonetheless essential that we address the development aspects at the same time as we endeavour 
to find solutions for the revitalization of this organization.  
 
36. Norway  
 
We thank the Di rector -General for his report and the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their 
updates.  
 
Norway is pleased to note that the need to strengthen the multilateral trading system through 
modernization and reform has become a more broadly accepted objective.  In this context, we welcome 
the G20 statement from Buenos Aires. We realise that views are diverging when we talk about specific 
changes and reform issues, but we are pleased to note a shared will to work within the system.  
 
We are grateful to Canada for  arranging a Ministerial -level discussion among a significant and diverse 
group of Members that share the fundamental objective of supporting rules -based trade anchored in 
the WTO.  
 
We welcome recent proposals addressing transparency and notification requ irements. We do not agree 
to all elements, but we welcome the discussion, as we share the view that the current track -record of 
Members' compliance with their notification obligations is not good enough, and that transparency is 
essential for building trus t and laying the ground for making progress in negotiations.  
 
Let me in this context also point out that the picture is not all dark. Important work is going on in the 
various WTO committees such as the Trade Facilitation Committee where Members are active, 
disagreements are worked out, and important information is being shared for the common good. And, 
let us not forget, while we are deeply concerned with increasing protectionism and unilateralism, on 
the ground the rules are generally functioning an d millions of exchanges and border crossings are 
happening every day.  
  
The issue of Appellate Body vacancies remains unresolved. Norway calls on all Members to agree 
without further delay to resolve this unacceptable situation, which threatens to undermin e the 
efficiency of this organization.  
 
At the same time, Norway recognises the concerns raised by Members in relation to the functioning 
of the Appellate Body. Even if we do not share those concerns, we are willing to listen and engage in WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 97 - 
 
  a conversation about those concerns. This is why we are among the co -sponsors of proposals 
addressing those concerns, which will be presented to the General Council on Wednesday.  
 
Updating the rule -book is fundamental to the modernization and reform of an organization t hat is built 
on rules. In this context, Norway is delighted to see the positive engagement from many Members in 
following up the Joint Initiatives from MC11. The e -commerce initiative has, in particular, made good 
progress, and we are looking forward to th e next steps in this endeavour.  
 
On fisheries subsidies we urge all Members to submit updated notifications as soon as possible. Norway 
is encouraged by the constructive discussions that took place in the incubator groups this autumn. It 
is our hope that Members will engage in text -based negotiations with the same willingness to work 
together and search for approaches and ideas that can bring convergence and fulfil the mandate.  
 
The more fundamental challenge facing us in our effort to update the rule book , is the diverging 
priorities and views of Members. Many are pointing to so -called "21st century issues" and the need 
for "levelling the playing field". Others point to "unfinished business" while having very different views 
about which of these "unfinishe d" issues are the most important to address. Some are concerned that 
their particular priority is in danger of falling off the table as Members focus their attention on "current 
trade issues" and "reform".  
 
The discussions are also complicated by the fact that some issues have a clear political mandate, while 
other issues lack a commonly agreed basis for further work.  
 
In addition, some Members, are pursuing bilateral, regional or plurilateral tracks to develop new rules 
and commitments to enhance trade. O thers are concerned that "flexible multilateralism" represents a 
fundamental threat to the multilateral trading system.  
 
The only way we can deal with such divergent expectations is through dialogue, discussions and 
eventually negotiations on real and con crete issues and proposals.  
 
In these dialogues we cannot afford to ignore the concern of anybody – big or small, rich or poor. At 
the end of the day, effective modernization of the World Trade Organization needs support from all 
Members.  
 
In this context,  Norway would like to once again underline the need to give the development dimension 
sufficient weight and visibility – in particular in these days when a lot of attention is focused on the 
so-called "current trade issues" highlighted in the G20 statement .  
 
The most immediate threat to the rules -based trading system is the damaging effects of increased 
protectionism, unilateral measures and escalating trade tensions. While the system does need to be 
improved, we should be careful not to destroy the fundam ental principles upholding the rules -based 
order in our pursuit of reform. The WTO is in need of modernization, not demolition.  
 
37. Chile  
 
I would like to begin my statement by acknowledging that we have reached a critical juncture for this 
organization and f or trade multilateralism – a juncture at which it is vital to continue defending an 
open, non -discriminatory and rules -based trading system, in the face of protectionist practices, 
instances of managed trade, and trade tensions.  
 
As a way of addressing this critical juncture, we support the call to modernise and reform the WTO so 
as to defend the multilateral trading system and bring it into line with modern times and new 
requirements. In doing so, and in order to ensure that the benefits of trade are wi dely shared, we 
must not overlook the relationship between trade and development, or the need to align ourselves 
with the 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals.  
 
After many meetings, we have now reached a point where we see growing political wi ll to move 
forward with WTO reform and modernization. On all occasions – and most notably in the recent 
Ministerial Declaration made in Ottawa – Chile has undertaken to participate constructively and pro -
actively in this effort, the final outcome of which should be the repositioning of the WTO at the heart 
of the multilateral trading system.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 98 - 
 
  In this respect, we would like to acknowledge and express our appreciation of the various steps taken 
by the Director -General to obtain political support for this WTO strengthening and modernization 
process. We urge him to continue supporting the entire Membership in this challenge in 2019.  
 
Modernising and Updating the WTO  
 
The modernization process must cover all the main levels, processes and functions of the WTO, so  as 
to bring the organization into line with the new realities of the 21st century economy, increase the 
efficiency and effectiveness of our work and, of course, generate concrete and tangible outcomes.  
 
We must focus on renewing our principles and objecti ves, while ensuring free and fair trade based on 
balanced competition for all countries and businesses.  
 
• Concrete proposals  
 
In recent months we have seen important initiatives to advance reform in specific areas. In our view, 
the most important thing is f or concrete proposals to be put to all Members, thereby generating 
inclusive dialogue and an inclusive negotiating process where everyone can give their opinion, present 
their ideas and defend their interests.  
 
We welcome and very much value the initiative  by the United States, Argentina, Costa Rica and other 
countries in the Council for Trade in Goods, which seeks to improve compliance with notification and 
transparency obligations. These obligations, together with improvements in the WTO's deliberative 
function, are vital to ensure the efficiency and effectiveness of our work.  
 
The delegation of Chile also welcomes the proposals regarding the dispute settlement system that will 
be submitted to the General Council next Wednesday by the European Union and ot her Members. We 
understand that these proposals aim to address a significant part, if not all, of the criticism that has 
been expressed regarding procedural aspects and certain substantive aspects of the functioning of the 
dispute settlement system.  
 
These  proposals should also be useful for helping us make progress in appointing new Appellate Body 
members.  
 
We now have before us not only questions about the dispute settlement system, but also proposed 
solutions, and for that reason a different approach sho uld be adopted: we now need to focus on 
cooperation and flexibility in order to generate outcomes that benefit everyone.  
 
Chile once again welcomes the concrete proposals and would like to express its willingness to 
participate constructively, in a middle -grounded manner and as a friend of the system, in the 
negotiating process that is just beginning.  
 
Trade Negotiations  
 
We would like to emphasise the importance of the WTO's negotiating function and the need for a 
comprehensive agreement on the mechanisms and flexibility required to move towards reaching 
agreements that are in line with the modern global economy.  
 
Regarding specific issues, we would like to highlight the following efforts:  
 
• Fisheries subsidies  
 
Regarding fisheries subsidies, we would like t o express our country's interest in making further 
progress in this important negotiating process.  
 
We note all the hard work that has been carried out since the last Ministerial Conference in Buenos 
Aires, but are concerned to see that so much still remai ns to be done to fulfil the mandate of our 
Ministers, who called upon us to agree on comprehensive and effective disciplines that prohibit certain 
forms of fisheries subsidies that contribute to overcapacity and overfishing, and to eliminate subsidies 
that contribute to illegal, unregulated and unreported fishing.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 99 - 
 
  We wish to endorse the work programme proposed by the Chair, Ambassador of Mexico, Roberto 
Zapata, for the first half of 2019, and hope that it will energise the current negotiating process.  
 
• Agriculture  
 
Regarding agriculture, we would like to express our support for the work carried out by the Chair of 
the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session, Ambassador of Guyana, John Deep Ford, who has 
made a dedicated effort to move this process forwa rd. 
 
In our view, the work programme proposed at the most recent CoA SS meeting is heading in the right 
direction, and we hope that setting up small thematic groups will bring greater dynamism to the 
negotiations on domestic support, market access and expo rt competition, with a view to achieving an 
outcome at the next Ministerial Conference.  
 
In light of the foregoing, I would like to take this opportunity to emphasise the importance of the 
agricultural negotiations in the multilateral trading system, and a lso the importance of ensuring that 
the entire Membership contributes constructively to these negotiations.  
 
• Electronic commerce  
 
With regard to the discussions on electronic commerce, we are interested in seeing progress and 
concrete proposals that would enable this important sector of the modern economy to be incorporated 
into the WTO's rules and disciplines.  
 
• Market access for services  
 
We would like to thank the Chair of the Council for Trade in Services in Special Session for her report 
on the development of the initiative concerning exploratory discussions on market access for services.  
Chile and the other co -sponsors of document JOB/SERV/282 are working on a paper concerning a 
service sector of common interest to the Membership, which we hope to circulate in the coming weeks, 
thereby initiating exploratory discussions on market access. We invite Members to participate actively 
in the discussions and to circulate documents concerning their areas of interest.  
 
Inclusivity Agenda  
 
Improving the mu ltilateral trading system involves addressing new challenges.  
 
It is our obligation to include in our discussions issues that form a key part of current international 
debate, such as climate change, gender and social inclusiveness. Their relationship with trade is 
undeniable, and addressing them properly is essential for fulfilling the 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable 
Development Goals.  
 
In this respect, I would like to highlight two issues that, in our view, are of great significance in terms 
of inclusivity . These issues, endorsed at the WTO Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires, are the 
promotion and development of MSMEs, and women and trade.  
 
• Promotion and development of MSMEs  
 
We value the support and encouragement that we are able to give in the WTO to the development of 
small and medium -sized enterprises and their links with international trade and global value chains.  
 
Trade multilateralism can be extremely useful in this segment of our economies, as MSMEs account 
for the majority of enterprises in our  countries and provide around 70% of jobs, despite their low level 
of participation in international trade.  
 
The activities of the WTO's Informal Working Group on MSMEs are of strategic importance for 
promoting the integration of these enterprises. We than k Ambassador José Luis Cancela for his 
excellent coordination of the Group.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 100 - 
 
  • Women and trade  
 
Looking at things from the perspective of gender, there is a need to significantly increase the 
participation of women in international trade.  
 
Ensuring that the existing institutional framework for entrepreneurship and innovation serves women 
who are keen to set up businesses and move forward, must form part of the WTO's efforts.  
 
We therefore welcome and appreciate the initiatives undertaken this past year by cer tain Members 
and organizations, which have focused on women's role in world trade.  
 
For our part, I am pleased to announce that gender is one of the Chilean presidency's priority issues 
for APEC 2019. The issue "Women and Inclusive Growth" has been include d in a bid to ensure progress 
in the elimination of barriers that restrict women's full participation in the economy, and to cast light 
on and reinforce women's contribution as a source of growth and economic development.  
 
Reiteration of Chile's Commitment  to Modernization and Reform  
 
In conclusion, I would like to reiterate Chile's commitment to the modernization and reform of the 
WTO.  
 
Our delegation welcomes the concrete proposals that have been submitted and will work constructively 
to implement the ref orms needed to renew and strengthen trade multilateralism – a system at the 
heart of which our organization, the WTO, lies.  
 
38. Turkey  
 
We thank the Director General for holding this meeting of the TNC and for his report and the 
Negotiating Group Chairs for t heir reports – ahead of the General Council meeting.  
 
This meeting would give us a valuable opportunity to take stock of what has happened since MC11 
and shed light on next year's discussions.  
 
Turkey has always been a strong supporter of the WTO rules -based multilateral trade system.  
 
It is true that we are at a critical juncture. Potential uncertainties and tensions we talked about on the 
way to MC11 last year became real in 2018. Predictability in global trade has gradually been fading 
away. This is ra ising alarm bells for many Members.  
 
Out of our discussions throughout 2018, the idea on the need to improve the system or modernization 
of the WTO has emerged. Turkey recognises that the rulebook of the WTO may need some updating 
to be more responsive and  effective in the face of new realities. We also recognise the certain concerns 
and complaints expressed by some Members about the current system, including issues on 
transparency and revision of certain rules.  
 
This should be a balanced discussion. The W TO rulebook fell short of providing developing Members 
with necessary rules for their longer -term objectives or addressing the imbalances in global trade. We 
should not forget that new realities emerged in the development landscape as well.  
 
So, whatever the discussion on modernization of the system, it should be inclusive and encompassing. 
If a one -way process that ignores the development perspective is initiated, this will have far -reaching 
ramifications beyond this house with respect to ach ievement of SDGs and tackling other related 
development issues, such as migration, poverty and food security which are global concerns.  
 
In this vein, we are happy to see a language in the G20 Final Communiqué reaffirming:  
 
- trade as an engine of growth, p roductivity, employment and development,  
 
- and the contribution of the multilateral trading system to that end.  
 
This issue is now on the radar of G20 Leaders and we hope that this contributes to our discussions 
here, also with respect to the improvement o f the system as stated in the Final Communiqué.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 101 - 
 
  We reiterate our call to refrain from unilateral actions. As I stressed, we understand the concerns of 
some Members. We hope that some of those concerns, such as transparency, could be addressed 
soon. But, th e answer does not lie in unilateral actions. These actions will only result in putting more 
pressure on the system.  
   
We will have to figure a way forward on how we can make the WTO more effective through dialogue. 
In the meantime, preservation of the WT O and its functioning will be critical. In addition to avoiding 
unilateral actions, ensuring the smooth functioning of the dispute settlement system will determine 
the direction the WTO will take.  
 
There are certain proposals regarding the dispute settlem ent. We will make further comments on 
those proposals during the General Council. But, in the coming months, we would caution against 
making the issue of Appellate Body subordinate to other matters concerning the effectiveness of the 
WTO.  
  
When it comes to ongoing undertakings, starting from agriculture negotiations, we commend the 
efforts of CoA SS Chair Ambassador Ford for intensifying the technical discussions in agriculture 
negotiations in all subjects.  
 
Useful discussions have taken place to refresh  the minds of the Members and understand the current 
issues underlying the agriculture negotiations in recent months.  
 
As a continuation of this process, we also welcome the proposed way forward for the discussions in all 
agriculture negotiations in comin g months. To make progress, we believe all Members should focus 
on how to break the deadlock rather than emphasising political sensitivities and red lines.   
  
On fisheries subsidies, Turkey's commitment to work toward delivering a meaningful and credible 
outcome by the end of 2019 remains strong. Despite all the efforts of the Negotiating Group on Rules 
Chair, unfortunately Members have not been able to register even an incremental progress to bridge 
the existing differences after Buenos Aires. It is obvio us that both the Members looking for having an 
ambitious agreement and those who are looking for keeping their policy space in their subsidy policies 
will have to be more flexible and constructive in next year's negotiations if we are to fulfil our mandate . 
Some compromises will have to be made especially in light of this case being perceived as a litmus 
test on the Members' ability to deliver multilateral outcomes.  
 
We also see good work done in some areas, such as e -commerce and MSMEs.  
 
The work on the Joint Initiative on Electronic Commerce has been substantive. We see the motivation 
to move forward for negotiations by some Members and we remain open minded to explore options 
on how to move forward. But, the balance between what can be achieved multilat erally and the ideal 
aim for some others who want to go beyond that should be carefully calibrated.   
 
For Turkey, strengthening MSMEs is a valuable policy option for solving the bottleneck problem in 
global trade. The thematic sessions of the Informal Working Group on MSMEs were helpful in that 
sense.  
 
We maintain that our work in the group should focus o n the subjects where WTO toolbox can develop 
solutions. Having said that, Turkey welcomes the proposed agenda for next steps, which includes a 
roadmap with a more active approach to expand Membership in order to help the inclusive nature of 
the group. This  will help us establish a formal work programme by the next Ministerial Conference.   
 
We welcome the active discussion in the area of services. Turkey appreciates the efforts of all those 
who have engaged so far. We are open to any initiative that is aime d at reinvigorating the work of the 
CTS. We have approached all of these initiatives favourably, engaged constructively and are pleased 
with the work that has been undertaken by like -minded Members in developing disciplines in domestic 
regulation.  
 
We wou ld like to emphasise once again that in order to achieve a balanced liberalization in services 
trade under the WTO, Mode 4 market access and disciplines should be an indispensable part of our 
work. Next year, we intend to adopt an active stance to achieve this target.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 102 - 
 
  In trade facilitation, we are pleased to see that there is increasing engagement from Members towards 
the full implementation of the TFA. Throughout the year the Committee on Trade Facilitation held 
useful meetings with active engagement of the Members. The situation on notifications by the 
Members under the Agreement also improved. In addition, dedicated sessions on assistance and 
support for capacity building contributed the implementation capabilities of the Members.  
 
I hope these remarks  help carry our discussions forward in the new year. Turkey stands ready to work 
closely with all Members to overcome the challenges the WTO is facing.  
 
39. Peru  
 
Peru thanks the Director -General and the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their reports and 
comments.  
 
Peru supports a multilateral system that ensures predictability for international trade activities. We 
view trade as an engine for economic development, in that it generates jobs and improves the level 
of well -being of the population, above all i n developing countries. We therefore take a positive view 
of the discussions on strengthening, modernising and reforming the WTO.  
 
We value and view with interest the initiatives and proposals to improve the efficiency of the WTO's 
monitoring function, in particular the provisions on transparency, as well as those initiatives and 
proposals that seek to strengthen the dispute settlement system and the Appellate Body, and to 
update trade rules through negotiations.  
 
My country undertakes to continue participa ting constructively in these discussions, with a view to 
achieving outcomes that benefit us all. We call upon the Membership to work with commitment and 
diligence in the discussions on strengthening, modernising and reforming the WTO, so as to ensure 
that enough progress has been made to make decisions by the time we reach the next Ministerial 
Conference.  
 
Peru considers the achievements of the multilateral trade negotiations obtained at the most recent 
Ministerial Conferences to be very valuable, and is wo rking hard to fully implement the Trade 
Facilitation Agreement. In this respect, we have, this year, created a Multi -sectoral Commission for 
Foreign Trade Facilitation which acts as the national committee provided for in the Agreement. This 
will enable us to make further progress in meeting the objectives set out in this instrument.  
 
Peru, together with a group of other Latin American Members, is also actively participating in the 
discussions on fisheries subsidies. In this regard, we support the change in approach in the 2019 work 
programme drawn up by the Negotiating Group on Rules, which means beginning negotiations in 
January next year on the basis of the simplified document TN/RL/W/274/Rev.6 and the new proposals 
submitted by Members. We are committed t o stepping up the dialogue with other delegations in order 
to deliver a multilateral agreement on fisheries subsidies in 2019, as was agreed by our Ministers in 
Buenos Aires.  
 
We encourage Members to continue participating actively in the negotiations on fisheries subsidies 
and to step up the pace of the discussions on agriculture. We also urge Members to become more 
involved in the negotiations on the domestic regulation of services and the discussions on electronic 
commerce, the integration of micro, sma ll and medium -sized enterprises in international trade, and 
women's economic empowerment.  
 
Peru considers that regularising the operational capacity of the Appellate Body and achieving 
meaningful outcomes in the negotiations are matters of utmost importanc e and urgency. To this end, 
we must redouble our efforts to prioritise these issues in our discussions and address both pillars in 
parallel.  
 
The current situation in the Appellate Body threatens the functioning and stability of the multilateral 
trading sy stem, and we must therefore begin the selection process to fill the existing vacancies as 
soon as possible. We cannot allow the multilateral trading system to lose credibility; nor can we refrain 
from establishing clear and predictable rules that are of vi tal importance for the development of 
international trade and the enhancement of the well -being of our people.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 103 - 
 
  40. Kenya  
 
My delegation associates itself with the statements delivered by Malawi, South Africa and Indonesia 
on behalf of the ACP, African Group a nd the G -33 respectively. We also align ourselves with the 
statement delivered by Canada on the ongoing WTO reforms initiatives.  
 
We thank the Director -General for his report. We also thank the Chairs of various Negotiating Groups 
for their updates on the state of ongoing discussions and consultations on various subjects under 
consideration.  
  
The WTO and the multilateral trading system in general are facing unprecedented challenges. The 
negotiating function seems not to be delivering the desired outcome; t he impasse in the appointment 
of the Appellate Body members threatens the enforcement of the WTO rules; the rise in trade 
protectionist measures is increasing uncertainty within and destabilising the multilateral trading 
system, while the validity of key p rinciples, processes and procedures of the WTO are being 
undermined. This is thus a trying time for this organization, and we are therefore all called upon to 
play our part in addressing these challenges. I wish to assure the Director -General of my full su pport 
and commitment, as well as that of my delegation, as you advance the work of the WTO.  
 
I would like to state Kenya's position on these issues as follows.  
 
On the operation of the Dispute Settlement Body, Kenya has always advocated for an effective d ispute 
settlement mechanism and that is why we are ready to join any effort to ensure that the rules 
governing global trade and, or the multilateral trading system as enshrined in the WTO agreements 
are protected and safeguarded. This includes ensuring tha t the DSB also adheres to its mandate and 
procedures as stipulated in the Dispute Settlement Understanding agreement. We note the ongoing 
efforts by groups of Members in the WTO who have come up with papers and proposals to try and 
resolve concerns raised in this area. In this regard, Kenya commits to constructively engage with other 
WTO Members to resolve these concerns and unlock the process of appointment of the Appellate Body 
members, before the operations of the DSB are completely paralysed. The willin gness of Members to 
listen to and engage each other is the best means of enabling us to reach an agreeable and balanced 
outcome.  
 
On the WTO negotiations, Kenya is greatly concerned regarding the lack of progress on issues of great 
importance to us i.e. o n trade -distorting domestic support, cotton, public stockholding for food security 
purposes, the special safeguards mechanism, and special and differential treatment. The current 
stalemate in the negotiations if not urgently addressed, will further exacerb ate the marginalization of 
Kenya and other developing and least -developed countries in their participation in the multilateral 
trading system.  
 
Development should remain at the centre in all areas of the negotiations with a view to supporting the 
full inte gration of developing and least -developed countries into the multilateral trading system. In 
that regard, we note with concern that work on strengthening the S&DT provisions has not delivered 
the results desired.  
 
As you are aware the G -90 have made sever al attempts to develop proposals to actualise para 44 of 
the Doha mandate on special and differential treatment. However, these proposals have not been 
given the consideration they deserve from Members, and indeed some of them have received a lot of 
resist ance and unwillingness by some Members to engage constructively.  
 
We acknowledge that in principle, all WTO Members may require and, or already have flexibilities in 
trade rules that protect their sensitivities. Further, we note that special provisions in the WTO 
agreements are intended to help developing countries integrate in the multilateral trading system and 
benefit from opportunities provided by the system. However, these provisions are not effective enough 
to ensure favourable results.   
 
Kenya therefore calls upon the entire Membership of the WTO to support the G -90 process aimed at 
strengthening the agreement specific proposals on special and deferential treatment. While some 
Members have concerns regarding this topic Kenya believes these can b e addressed through mutually 
agreeable solutions. However, this can only be achieved by allowing discussions on the G -90 proposals 
to commence.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 104 - 
 
  On fisheries subsidies, Kenya is committed to and expects an outcome in line with the MC11 decision 
and the SDG  14.6 mandate. In this regard, appropriate and effective special and differential treatment 
should be an integral part of any outcome on fisheries subsidies. We note the progress achieved so 
far in this area and urge Members to focus greater efforts on tex t-based discussions and finding ways 
of integrating the ideas generated by the informal Incubators Group discussions into the work process.    
 
On agriculture, domestic support in agriculture is a priority for Kenya and therefore we expect concrete 
results  in this area. We are also looking forward to constructive engagement on the issue of Public 
Stockholding for Food Security in the dedicated sessions of the CoA SS in order to reach an agreement 
on a permanent solution without any further delay.    
 
We hav e also witnessed intensive work being undertaken by some Members on some issues outside 
the multilateral front, such as on e -commerce, investment facilitation, domestic regulation and Micro, 
Small & Medium Enterprises. There is no doubt that sharing experi ences, and best practices, as well 
as fostering more in -depth understanding are critical in addressing knowledge gaps, as well as the 
legitimate concerns of some Members. Members should therefore demonstrate flexibility and 
constructive engagement on these  issues.  
 
Finally, Kenya has been taking part in the ongoing Canadian -led discussions on the WTO reforms, 
focusing on three key pillars of the WTO. i.e. negotiations, transparency and the Dispute Settlement 
Body including the operations of the regular comm ittees of the WTO. We note the divergent views of 
Members on this topic, particularly on the process and substance. It is also clear that issues that are 
currently being considered in the reform initiatives are the same issues that are affecting optimal 
operation of the WTO and the multilateral trading system. Kenya therefore calls upon Members to 
show flexibility in seeking common ground and discussing these issues with open mind through a 
multilateral, transparent, inclusive and development -centred approa ch. 
 
In closing, I wish to express the Republic of Kenya's appreciation for the support and participation by 
UN Member States in the Sustainable Blue Economy Conference which was hosted in Kenya from 26 
to 28 November in Nairobi, together with co -host, Can ada and Japan and co -sponsors Portugal, 
Norway, Fiji, the United Kingdom, China, the European Union, Nigeria, Sudan, Ireland, South Africa, 
Qatar and the African Union.  
 
Over 18,000 participants from 184 countries took part in the Conference's 300 events, which focused 
on how to build a blue economy that harnesses the potential of our oceans, seas, lakes, and rivers to 
improve the lives of all, particularly people in developing countries, women and youth as well as 
leveraging the latest innovations, scienti fic advances and best practices to build prosperity, while 
conserving our waters for future generations.  
 
Your constructive engagement as Member States in the meeting enabled it to be carried out very 
successfully.  
 
Appreciation also goes to Canada for her  contribution during the conference on reaching an agreement 
in the WTO negotiations on disciplines for fisheries subsidies and on harnessing global action to tackle 
illegal unreported and unregulated fishing.  
 
We look forward to sharing more on the outcom e of the conference on a future date.  
 
41. Hong Kong, China  
 
At the last TNC -HODs meeting, the Director -General described the global economic landscape as 
"rather uncertain and mixed". Due to escalating trade tensions and new tariffs, he warned about a 
real th reat to stability, jobs and growth. At that time, the WTO forecasts for trade growth in 2018 had 
already been revised downwards, from 4.4% to 3.9%.  
 
Then, in November, came his trade monitoring report. It tells us that, for the year running up to mid -
Octob er 2018, the amount of trade covered by new import -restrictive measures imposed by WTO 
Members had hit a new high. At USD588 billion, it was more than seven times larger than that recorded 
in the previous reporting period. The measures imposed by G20 econo mies alone, just between mid -
May and mid -October, accounted for USD480 billion. Commenting on the G20 situation, he again 
warned of serious consequences.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 105 - 
 
  No wonder the latest World Trade Outlook Indicator released 2 weeks ago had to give a reading of 
98.6, which is the lowest since October 2016. There are declines in all component indices, and we are 
now looking at a slowing -down trade growth, from 4.7% last year, to 3.9% this year, and then to 
3.7% next year.  
 
I am not an economist, but I think it is obvious to anyone that these numbers should be a cause of 
grave concern. We do not have to wait until global trade is really reduced by 17% and GDP growth by 
1.9%, to know that the Director -General earlier warning about the devastating effect of a full -blown 
global trade war is no false alarm.  
 
Hong Kong, China as a small, open economy has always been highly vulnerable to external factors.  
But as a collateral damage of global trade conflicts, Hong Kong, China will not be alone. Given the 
inter-connectivity  and complexity of global value chains, increasing trade barriers and protectionism 
will result in higher cost of business for all the economies concerned. Even mere threats of more 
measures to come can generate sufficient uncertainties to weaken traders' confidence and dampen 
trade and investment.  
 
For decades, the rules -based multilateral trading system has been providing the most effective 
safeguard for international trade. We have seen how good global trade governance has helped propel 
economic growth a nd create jobs, lifting millions of people out of poverty.  
 
As WTO Members and beneficiaries of the multilateral trading system, we all have strong vested 
interest in upholding this system. We need it to help us weather the current storm, and we need it to  
be robust enough for that.  
 
Hong Kong, China fully agrees that Members should constantly review and improve the functioning of 
the WTO. Since the last TNC -HODs meeting, ideas to reform or modernise the WTO have developed 
into concrete proposals, such as t he one on improving transparency, and others on strengthening the 
dispute settlement mechanism. Discussions have taken place in informal groups, at the CTG, and will 
also be held at the coming General Council meeting.  
 
Hong Kong, China welcomes and will co ntinue to be part of this constructive engagement. Given 
Members' diverse interests and priorities, any meaningful outcome can only be achieved through a 
transparent and inclusive process, and a balanced approach that recognises the rights and obligations 
of Members. At the same time, Members pursuing improvements must also act in good faith, have 
trust in international cooperation, and remain committed to the multilateral trading system.  
 
At this preliminary stage, no one expects immediate convergence in t he proposals. But it is important 
that we keep the dialogue going, so that we do not lose the momentum, and we do not lose focus.  
 
It is also important that we keep our existing functions going. In this regard, I wish to thank the 
Negotiating Group Chairs for their hard work, and the convenors of various MC11 Joint Statements 
Initiatives for taking the discussions forward. Hong Kong, China is pleased to see the negotiations on 
Fisheries Subsidies entering a new and more intense phase. At the same time, the E-Commerce and 
Investment Facilitation initiatives are making solid progress, ready to move onto text -based 
discussions in the coming year. We hope that all these developments, together with the more 
advanced negotiations on Services domestic regulations u nder the Joint Statement Initiative, can 
deliver for WTO Members tangible outcomes as we approach MC12.  
 
We must of course keep the dispute settlement functions going as well. At the coming General Council 
meeting, we will be talking about possible improve ments, but that conversation should not be a reason 
to delay appointments to the Appellate Body. The process for filling the four vacancies must start 
immediately.  
 
I do not have the crystal ball to tell whether, this time next year, the Director -General w ill be able to 
share with us a better outlook in his trade monitoring reports and trade forecasts. What I do know is 
that we need not wait passively for that verdict.  
 
As WTO Members, we can play a proactive role in arresting and reversing the negative tre nds.  
Together, we can put global trade back on track – if we work in earnest to de -escalate trade tensions, 
if we take our WTO commitments seriously, if we stop testing the limits of the multilateral trading WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 106 - 
 
  system with unjustified unilateral actions, and  if we enter into a sincere and rational debate to improve 
this organization.  
 
With this, I look forward to the WTO turning challenges into opportunities, and emerging in 2019 
stronger and better.  
 
42. Nigeria  
 
Nigeria thanks the Director -General for convening this meeting, for his painstaking efforts, for his 
recent activities, and also for his candid assessment. Nigeria is also grateful to the Chairs of the 
Negotiating Groups for their hard work and updates. Ni geria considers this meeting as an important 
stocktaking. Abuja is mindful of the fact that, this year has been characterised by unprecedented 
challenges in international trade, particularly for the multilateral trading system. There is no doubt 
that the W TO is faced with a complex range of challenges; notably the stalemate in the appointment 
of the Appellate Body and the slow pace of the negotiations, which requires improvement and urgency.  
Yet, Nigeria considers that this is a moment of unique opportunit y for change and improvement.   
 
Regarding the current proposals on the WTO reform, and more recently, the Canadian -led initiative, 
based on clear instructions from Abuja, we would like to share Nigeria's perspective as follows: First 
and foremost, multila teral institutions periodically require update, reform and modernization in 
response to changing circumstances. Nigeria is convinced that there is scope for WTO reform, 
modernization and update to serve 21st Century requirements for growth and contribution s to 
development, welfare and job creation.  
 
Second, an updated and modernised WTO is good for a healthy global economy, so that it continues 
to contribute to strengthening economic welfare, peace and security in international economic 
relations and a sta ble global order.   
 
Third, international cooperation for trade is essential for global economic order. The WTO is central to 
global order.  
 
Fourth, Nigeria reaffirms its commitment to rules -based trade multilateralism, in its negotiated 
configurations an d formats, trade openness and integration, accompanied by rules -based trade 
remedy safeguards against injurious trade practices and, an effective and functioning WTO Dispute 
Settlement.    
 
Fifth, Nigeria has noted the several tracks in the dialogue and co nsultative exchanges on WTO reform 
and modernization. Nigeria welcomes this engagement and encourages the widening of this process 
so that the process of WTO reform is broad, balanced and takes due and appropriate regard of all 
perspectives and positions i n the WTO Membership, including those of developing countries, at 
different stages of development. WTO Membership is a contract, based on disciplines, a balance of 
rights and obligations, and policies, in an enforceable dispute settlement system. In this c ontext, 
reform perspectives will vary. This is why the reform process should be open and transparent, result -
oriented and without being impaired and deadlocked.   
 
Sixth, although WTO fundamentals are sound, reforms are required across a range of areas. Ke y 
aspects of the reform process will entail identifying the range of areas where these reforms are 
required, designing solutions and with an understanding of the vehicle to manage the results from the 
reform exercise. Across the issues, designing the devel opment dimension of the rules -based 
multilateral trading system shall be critical and of defining importance. The ultimate purpose of trade 
openness, integration and a rules -based global economy, with appropriate safeguards, is growth, 
development, welfare  and job creation, in a system that delivers win -win outcomes for all WTO 
Members. This is why innovation, flexibility, pragmatism and compromise shall be central to a 
successful WTO reform process. Africa's position is embodied in the emerging Agreement E stablishing 
the African Continental Free Trade Area. Accommodating the AfCFTA shall be salient in improving the 
development dimension of the rules -based multilateral trading system. This and other points in this 
statement were noted at the meeting of Afric an Senior Trade Officials in Cairo, yesterday, Sunday, 9 
December.  
 
Seventh, update and modernization of the WTO are overdue and necessary. This is why Nigeria 
welcomes the range of efforts underway and supports WTO reform, update and modernization. 
Wideni ng the process of consultations on WTO reform, will increase systemic ownership. This is why WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 107 - 
 
  Nigeria welcomes the recent conference on WTO Reform by France, also, in which Nigeria was invited 
to participate. Nigeria shall continue to support the process of  reform and encourage an enlargement 
of the process. The momentum for reform should be sustained. In this context, Nigeria underlines the 
position in its diplomacy and international trade and economic relations that supports the reform of 
multilateral inst itutions to reflect contemporary economic and political realities, supports rational 
policy space and the efforts of countries for domestic institutional and structural reforms for growth 
and development. Nigeria shall be engaged and attentive to the detai ls of the process and substance 
of WTO reform, modernization and update.   
 
Eighth, the specifics of the proposals for reforms, require detailed discussions and inputs from our 
capital. This process has only just been initiated. This is a preliminary input  by Nigeria to the on -going 
and evolving process. Specific positions will be developed in constructive engagement with all 
Members.  Furthermore, Nigeria notes that ECOWAS, as a customs union, is yet to consider the subject 
of WTO reform.   
 
Focusing on th e negotiations, we need to work hard to conclude negotiations on Fisheries Subsidies, 
consistent with MC11 instructions by our Ministers. This is a key element of the Sustainable 
Development Goal 14.6. We must keep up the pressure in the areas with specifi c deadlines, such as 
fisheries subsidies and the public stockholding for food security. At the same time, we need to advance 
work in other important and long -standing issues, such as agriculture, services and development. 
Nigeria is supportive of the Chair -led process. This process must be open, transparent and inclusive. 
In this regard, we urge all Members to show flexibility and strive towards bridging the existing 
differences. Looking forward, we should maintain a sense of urgency on all negotiating issu es, 
including, special and differential treatment for developing countries, especially for the LDCs, as a 
matter of priority.  
 
It is worth noting that Nigeria has been participating actively in all the Joint Initiatives on Investment 
Facilitation for Devel opment, e -commerce, Domestic Regulations in Trade in Services, MSMEs and 
Trade and Women's Economic Empowerment. In Nigeria's assessment, some progress has been made 
in these areas, although much still needs to be done to achieve multilateral outcomes. How ever, there 
must be space for individual Members to pursue their commercial interests in different positive 
configurations that do not undermine others, but contribute to a healthy global economy. This on -
going process must remain open, transparent and inc lusive. Development must remain a core 
objective. We look forward positively, to the next steps, including possible text -based discussions next 
year.  
 
In conclusion, for transparency and information sharing, Nigeria, on 7 December, took over the 
coordinat ion of the Informal Group of Member States of ECOWAS to the WTO, from Togo. Nigeria 
commends Ambassador Yackoley Johnson and his dedicated team for the hard work, initiatives and 
leadership during their tenure. The first Extraordinary Meeting of ECOWAS Tra de Ministers, chaired by 
Nigeria, will be held in Cairo, Egypt on 12 December, on the margins of the AU Trade Ministerial 
Meeting in Cairo. The ECOWAS Trade Policy Committee has also been established. The ETPC will reflect 
the priorities of its Member Stat es. This is a critical and a major step forward in the reform agenda of 
ECOWAS. Nigeria urges all WTO Members to implement all the Decisions in favour of LDCs in order to 
facilitate their integration into the multilateral trading system in a sustainable ma nner. Nigeria, agrees 
with the Director -General that collectively we must turn the crisis of multilateralism into an opportunity 
to strengthen it. This urgent task is not insurmountable. Nigeria stands ready to work closely with all 
WTO Members to overcome  the current challenges facing our organization in line with our development 
objectives.  
 
43. Cambodia  
 
Cambodia associates itself with the statements made by Central African Republic on behalf of LDC 
Group and by Singapore on behalf of ASEAN.  
 
Cambodia is concerned with the slow progress on the negotiations and the spread of protectionism on 
a global scale that negatively impacts global growth.  
 
For this stage of consultations and discussions as well as for the way forward in 2019, my delegation 
encourages all Members to continue to redouble their efforts to work on the remaining DDA issues by 
addressing the concerns and interests of developing Members especially of the LDCs.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 108 - 
 
  My delegation would like to stress that special and differential treatment and dev elopment assistance 
are very important for us to truly benefit from the multilateral trading system.  
 
We would like to highlight the important elements contained in past Ministerial Decisions in Bali, 
Nairobi and Buenos Aires in favour of LDCs including Du ty-Free Quota -Free Market Access, preferential 
rules of origin and Services Waiver. We would therefore like to call on Members to fully implement 
those decisions. My delegation would like to take this opportunity, particularly, to thank the Members 
for pro viding preferential treatment to us. We hope for their continued support.  
 
My delegation welcomes the initiatives by Members on WTO reform. We will carefully study them. At 
this moment, Cambodia supports the proposal by China that the WTO Reform shall pres erve the core 
values of the multilateral trading system as it plays very crucial role in promoting sustainable 
development, reducing poverty and boosting global growth.  
 
With regard to the proposal stating that WTO Reform shall safeguard the development in terests of 
developing Members, Cambodia wishes to add that "the WTO reform shall safeguard the development 
interests of developing Members especially of the LDCs". It is very important for Members to take into 
consideration and safeguard the interests of t he LDCs.  
 
On the proposal that the WTO Reform shall follow the practice of the decision -making by consensus, 
we are of the view that consensus is one of the core principle which has been used to adopt all issues 
under this organization.  
 
Cambodia emphasise s that the smooth functioning of the Dispute Settlement Body is important as it 
has played a key role in resolving trade disputes under this organization. Cambodia therefore stresses 
the importance of filling the current vacancies of the Appellate Body wit hout delay. We urge Members 
to speed up and support the process of selection as soon as possible.  
 
Last but not least, my delegation has recognised that the world digital technology has become a tool 
to ease the way for doing business which can be contribu ted to trade growth and development needs. 
In this connection, the WTO reform should keep the WTO rules more relevant by seriously taking into 
consideration the challenges and difficulties of LDCs in tackling new issues such as e -commerce.  
 
Finally, Cambod ia supports those reforms that maintain the centrality of the multilateral trading 
system, keep the preferential treatments and take deep consideration of the benefits and interests of 
LDCs.  
 
44. Thailand  
 
We thank the Director -General and the Chairs of the Ne gotiating Groups for their reports.  
 
Thailand would like to start off by reiterating our concern on the urgent and critical problem that we 
face in the appointment of the Appellate Body members and emphasise the need to resolve the 
Appellate Body impasse as soon as possible.  
 
In this regard, we appreciate and welcome the efforts of several Members in coming up with concrete 
proposals with a view to resolving the deadlock in this crucial area.  
 
Thailand will continue to be supportive of approaches and procedures that could lead to positive 
outcomes in this area and play a constructive role in pushing for solutions that will allow the launch of 
the Appellate Body Selection Process as soon as possible. We look forward to fruitful discussions under 
the rel evant agenda items in the upcoming General Council meeting.  
 
On the negotiations, Thailand remains committed to deliver negotiated outcomes in the WTO, 
especially on Fisheries Subsidies by 2019 and Agriculture by MC12.  
 
In this regard, we welcome and supp ort the proposed work plan from the CoA SS Chair as well as the 
dynamic, Member -driven process in the work programme for January to July 2019 adopted by the 
Negotiating Group on Rules to intensify our work in the negotiations.  
 
We also stress the need for  compromise and flexibility from Members if we were to achieve meaningful 
outcomes in the near future.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 109 - 
 
  Thailand also welcomes notable progress in the discussion on the E -Commerce Joint Statement 
Initiative and supports enhancing the discussions which could  help promote the WTO's relevance to 
trade in the digital era. We look forward to constructively participating in this area, both under the 
Work Programme on Electronic Commerce and under the Joint Statement Initiative with a view to 
facilitating greater p articipation and benefits for all stakeholders especially in developing countries.  
 
We recognise the increasing discussions and calls for WTO Reform and will constructively discuss and 
exchange views on the issue with a view to enhancing the WTO and the mu ltilateral trading system. 
We view that it is the collective responsibility of Members to help the WTO remain relevant and 
effective. Nevertheless, any reform process should be inclusive and transparent, as well as ensuring 
that all perspectives and intere sts, especially the development dimension are taken into account to 
allow for balanced benefits.  
 
45. Costa Rica  
 
The WTO has proved to be a key instrument for development and has enabled Costa Rica and all WTO 
Members to participate harmoniously in the global  economy. It is a public good that we must preserve. 
However, preservation is not enough when we are faced with major challenges.  
 
The WTO has been a success story since its creation in 1995. But the world has changed. This means 
that the organization need s to adapt to the current climate in order to meet and address today's 
challenges, while strengthening its capacity to prevent and resolve disputes between its Members. 
Only in this way can we ensure that the WTO will remain operational and relevant today and in the 
coming decades.  
 
To this end, it is vital to facilitate the discussion and negotiation of issues that are relevant and of 
interest, by being flexible and pragmatic. In this respect, we would like to express our satisfaction 
concerning the progre ss made in the joint initiatives on electronic commerce, investment facilitation, 
micro, small and medium -sized enterprises, trade and gender, and domestic regulation in services, 
and will be following the next stages of this work with interest, hoping tha t they make the most of the 
momentum achieved on these topics.  
 
We also need to conclude and fulfil our mandate concerning critical global issues such as fisheries 
subsidies, and to fully deliver on our mandate in this area so as to meet the United Nations  Sustainable 
Development Goal Target 14.6. For this reason, we welcome the results -focused work programme.  
 
In the agricultural negotiations, Costa Rica supports the recent steps taken by the Chair and reiterates 
its willingness to work constructively and to contribute to technical discussions in any format.  
 
Furthermore, we need to ensure that the WTO dispute settlement system continues to be an effective 
mechanism for resolving trade disputes. It is therefore a priority to begin replacing Appellate Body 
members. In addition, we are pleased to endorse two proposals that will be discussed at the next 
General Council meeting, and hope that these proposals, and others, will help us solve the problems 
we face in this area.  
 
We also believe it is vital to revie w the mechanisms for ensuring fulfilment of the obligations that we 
all have as Members, in particular transparency and notification obligations. Transparency is a WTO 
principle and public good that we must all protect. Full compliance with notification co mmitments is 
one of the pillars that guarantee the proper functioning of the WTO multilateral trading system. 
Without timely access to information, the WTO's monitoring and negotiating functions are weakened, 
and the risk of trade frictions and conflict gr ows. For this reason, Costa Rica has, together with other 
Members, submitted a proposal to address this issue.  
 
Another matter we cannot forget to address is the proper functioning of regular WTO bodies. It is 
important to explore ways of optimising these bodies and making more effective use of them.  
 
Costa Rica is a small economy that relies on international trade. The WTO forms the basis of our trade 
policy and provides us with the framework within which we can trade with the world on a level footing, 
under stable conditions and with legal certainty. For our country, there is no alternative to the WTO. 
Our commitment to the system is based on the belief that only by improving and strengthening it so 
that it can pragmatically address the challenges it comes  up against, will it be able to remain 
operational and relevant. We will do our utmost to achieve this objective.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 110 - 
 
  46. Pakistan  
 
Pakistan thanks the Director -General and the Chairs of various Negotiating Groups for their 
comprehensive reports.  
 
Pakistan continu es to note with concern, the prevailing atmosphere of trade scepticism, unilateralism 
and threats against the multilateral system. It is encouraging at the same time that the Membership 
seems cognizant of the issues. The global economy is still delicately poised and can ill afford trade 
wars that destroy jobs and hurt livelihoods in poor countries. Pakistan remains hopeful for a resolution 
and will continue to support mutually acceptable solutions.  
 
Reform of the institution and its rules has become the new  flavour of the season. It is being hoped 
that the proposed reforms would pull the organization out of its current crisis. While we appreciate 
the efforts, we wish to highlight the glaring lack of focus on development as one of the main goals of 
the reform  process. We wish to remind Members that one of the reasons for the crisis of today is the 
inability of this organization to deliver on development needs of developing countries. If we truly aim 
for prosperity from trade for developing countries, we must n ot repeat past mistakes and ensure that 
reforms do not disproportionately affect developing countries.  
 
The concept of rule of law gains more importance when small and vulnerable countries are involved 
in global trade. The WTO's dispute settlement mechanis m rests on the same idea – the primacy of 
rule of law for all countries, regardless of their development levels. We are following the reforms 
suggested for the Appellate Body and the DSU closely. However, we also express serious concern that 
we may be runn ing out of time to fulfil our obligations under Article 17.2 of the DSU to fill vacancies 
in the Appellate Body.  
  
Pakistan is satisfied with our work in the CoA SS under the able leadership of Ambassador Ford. We 
welcome the proposed work programme for 20 19 but would like to underscore the importance of 
transparency and inclusiveness in any future process. We are hopeful that the proposed small working 
group process will help to overcome the impasse in agriculture negotiations. However, in our opinion, 
addressing the existing asymmetries in domestic support pillar in the Agriculture Agreement should 
be the starting point of our reforms agenda. An outcome on cotton -specific support is a priority for 
Pakistan and absolutely necessary for the credibility of th is organization. The principle of Special and 
Differential Treatment for all developing countries, particularly for LDCs and NFIDCs, has to be central 
to any negotiations. It is a basic pillar of multilateral trading system and one that symbolises the WTO.  
 
We are satisfied with our progress so far on fisheries subsidies in the Negotiating Group on Rules. We 
welcome the work programme proposed by the Negotiating Group on Rules Chair for next year and 
assure every one of our constructive engagement in any fu ture work to fulfil the mandate of MC11. 
We would also like to underscore here the importance of Artisanal and Small -Scale Fisheries for 
developing Members. Appropriate and effective S&D is critical in this regard.  
 
On E -Commerce, Pakistan wishes to contin ue its positive engagement in the Work Programme 
mandated by the Ministerial Decision in MC11. We will look forward to discussing issues under various 
bodies for this purpose.  
 
On Services, Pakistan has noted the proposals on Market Access discussions and on Domestic 
Regulation in Mode 4 and we will continue to participate in further developments.  
  
On the joint initiatives on MSMEs and Investment Facilitation, Pakistan would like to appreciate the 
efforts of the convenors and Members to fulfil the mandate of MC11. Pakistan will follow these 
discussions in 2019 and we hope that they feed positively into the multilateral system by addressing 
concerns of all Members.  
 
To conclude, Pakistan wishes to underscore the importance of constructive engagement to ensure that 
we keep the WTO system alive for inclusive growth and development. We hope that consensus will 
continue to remain the basis for decision -making in all our work.  
 
47. Trinidad and Tobago  
 
We thank the Director -General for convening this meeting and express our gratitude for the report on 
his activities and for the reports presented by the Chairpersons of the Negotiating Groups.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 111 - 
 
  My delegation aligns itself with the statements delivered on behalf of the Caribbean Community, the 
African, Caribbean and P acific Group of States and the G -33. 
 
In agriculture, we have taken note of the report of the Chair of the Committee on Agriculture in Special 
Session and refer to his state of play and way forward document for January to April 2019. My 
delegation benefitt ed from a discussion on that document at the recently concluded Informal Open -
ended meeting of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session. In agriculture some Members have 
submitted detailed proposals and we are heartened by the Chair's willingness to  solve problems that 
exist. 2019 is expected to bring an intensification of deliberations and we hope that there will be 
greater convergence among Members and not an entrenchment of positions. We continue to support 
agriculture negotiations within the fram ework of addressing the needs of Small, Vulnerable Economies.  
 
In Fisheries, the Chair of the Negotiating Group on Rules has suggested the schedule of work for 
January to July 2019, and we look forward to deeper engagement particularly as it relates to the  
facilitated small group discussions. Given the forthcoming deadline set by our Ministers, we need to 
make judicious use of the time ahead. We have been guided that appropriate and effective special 
and differential treatment for developing country Members  and least -developed country Members 
should be an integral part of the negotiations.  
 
As this delegation has continually highlighted, in relation to Electronic Commerce, we recognise its 
potential as a driver for economic growth and we welcome the informat ion sharing and exploratory 
discussions in the various WTO bodies, most recently manifested in the Council for Trade in Services.  
Trinidad and Tobago sees the need to secure policy space to develop responses to the range of issues 
connected to E -Commerce.  The Government of Trinidad and Tobago through the implementation of 
its E-Commerce Strategy is aggressively seeking to capitalise on the growth and development of e -
commerce because it has the potential to transform the economy.  
 
It is apparent that the calls from various actors for reform in the WTO have certainly gotten louder, 
however there is no clarity as to what WTO reform actually encompasses. For us any consideration of 
reform must aim at protecting the development interests of all developing and LDC Members. Any 
discussion on reform must be centred on ways to meaningfully make trade inclusive for all Members 
and contribute to development.  
 
It should be clear that the current situation facing the dispute settlement mechanism is critical. We 
urge Me mbers to work together to achieve an acceptable outcome in the shortest possible time. The 
calls for new rules will essentially be pointless if there is no effective system to treat with the existing 
rules of the WTO.  
 
In closing, I wish to repeat that Tri nidad and Tobago is committed to a rules -based multilateral trading 
system that is predictable, transparent, consensus -based and which supports inclusive growth and 
development.  
 
48. Viet Nam  
 
Viet Nam thanks the Director -General for convening this meeting and  sharing his assessment on the 
overall state -of-play, and the respective Chairs for their comprehensive reports.  
 
We all understand that a proper functioning of a rules -based, free, open, transparent and inclusive 
multilateral trading system is essential for all of us. We therefore commit to work together to improve 
system, including its negotiating, monitoring and di spute settlement functions; to adequately address 
critical challenges facing us, so that our people and businesses can continue to enjoy the benefits it 
brings. We will work to ensure the effective and timely enforcement of the WTO rules.  
 
With respect to  the Appellate Body issue, we associate ourselves with the statement by Singapore on 
behalf of ASEAN and wish to recall the proposal in WT/DSB/W/609/Rev.7 dated 7 December. All 
Members have shared responsibility to resolve this issue as soon as practicable  so that by the end of 
next year the system will continue to be capable of adjudicating disputes and judging on trade -
restrictive measures, thereby preserving the credibility of the whole system.  
 
49. Haiti (CARICOM)  
 
I am delivering this statement on behalf o f the CARICOM Group.  WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 112 - 
 
  I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate the Director -General for the report he submitted 
regarding the status of the discussions at the World Trade Organization as well as the last consultations 
he made since the last TNC  meeting.  
 
I would also like to thank the Chair of the various Negotiating Groups for their leadership and the 
tremendous efforts they have made for the advancement of the discussions related to their respective 
issues.  
 
The CARICOM Group wishes to extend a warm welcome to H.E. Ambassador Chad Blackman, who 
recently arrived in Geneva as Barbados' Permanent Representative to the WTO.  
 
The CARICOM Group believes that a clear, transparent, rules -based, multilateral trading system that 
takes into account the su stainable development dimension will better serve the interests of all 
Members, particularly the LDCs and SVEs.  
 
The CARICOM Group is still very concerned about the situation of the Appellate Body, which is facing 
so many difficulties to renew the mandate  of its Members, whose mission has come to an end. There 
is no doubt that such a situation paralyses the functioning of the Dispute Settlement Body which is a 
very important part of international trade regulation.  
 
The CARICOM Group takes note of current d iscussions and initiatives relating to WTO Reform. We 
continue to express our concerns over the manner in which they are unfolding and call on proponents 
to exercise a greater level of transparency, openness and inclusiveness to ensure that any approach 
aimed at improving the operation of the WTO takes into account the heterogeneity of its Membership 
and enjoys the confidence and ownership of all Members.  
 
With regard to public stockholding for food security purposes, the CARICOM Group is joining Members 
who are asking for a little more flexibility, given the great number of people in the rural areas that are 
facing serious difficulties to support themselves.  
 
The CARICOM Group is encouraged by the level of engagement in the fisheries subsidies discussions. 
We note the wide divergences that continue to exist on the bracketed text in view of the limited time 
available to deliver an outcome by December 2019. We urge flexibility on all sides and call for greater 
understanding of the development needs of the fish eries sector in LDCs and SVEs. CARICOM stands 
ready to contribute to initiatives aimed at arriving at a successful outcome in line with the MC11 
Ministerial mandate.  
 
With regard to services, the CARICOM Group encourages the progress made in the discussion s 
regarding market access, given the importance of trade in services for the Caribbean. However, 
progress in this area must reaffirm the existing flexibilities for developing countries, particularly LDCs 
and SVEs, consistent with GATS Articles IV and XIX; the Negotiating Guidelines and Procedures; and 
the Hong Kong Ministerial Declaration, including Annex C. The Group further believes that there is 
already a well -established process in place and which could guide the discussions on the way forward.  
 
The CARICOM Group reiterates its commitment to our work carried out under the 1998 Work 
Programme on Electronic Commerce as renewed by all our Ministers at the Eleventh WTO Ministerial 
Conference. We therefore welcome the recent discussions under the auspices of the General Council 
and look forward to further engagement, particularly on the development component of the Work 
Programme, in that forum, and in the respective bodies on issues of a specific and technical nature. 
The Group welcomes any step taken to s upport developing countries particularly those facing a lack 
of adequate infrastructure.  
 
The CARICOM Group recognises the commitment of the Committee on Accessions to accelerate the 
process so that some States could accede to the WTO before the next Minis terial meeting scheduled 
for 2020. Therefore, the Group welcomes such an initiative.  
 
50. Papua New Guinea (Pacific Group)  
 
I am delivering this statement on behalf of the Pacific Group. Our group also supports the statements 
made by the ACP and the LDC Groups . The Pacific Group wishes to thank the Director -General for his 
comprehensive report and commend him for his ongoing efforts to support Members in focusing our 
work. Our group also thanks the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their reports and for thei r WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 113 - 
 
  continuing efforts to try and help Members move the discussions and negotiations on the Doha Issues 
forward.  
 
The Pacific Group has been working actively and constructively to advance the negotiations on our 
priorities as mandated by MC11 and in the rema ining Doha Issues.  
 
On fisheries subsidies, the Pacific Group reiterates the significance of these negotiations to our region. 
As small island developing States, the fisheries sector is a vital sector for our livelihood security as 
well as our social, econ omic and sustainable development. The Pacific Island Forum Leaders' ongoing 
commitment to the fisheries sector includes the adoption of the region's "Blue Pacific" in 2017 and the 
endorsement of the 2018 Commonwealth's Blue Charter – both of which reflect the value we hold to 
reinforce our shared stewardship of the Pacific Ocean and its sustainable development.  
 
In 2018, our leaders have called on distant water fishing nations to reduce and eliminate harmful 
fishing subsidies. This led us to stress the imp ortance of advancing our work on the Agreement on 
Fisheries Subsidies. In this regard, the Pacific Group remains committed to delivering the MC11 
mandate to conclude an Agreement on Fisheries Subsidies in 2019 in order to meet the deadline of 
SDG 14.6. Whi le there remains wide divergence on many issues, the Pacific Group commends the 
work undertaken so far this year and in particular in the September Meeting by Clusters to generate 
new ideas through the incubator groups in the technical and thematic session s to clarify technical 
issues and aim to have text -based discussions to try to move the text forward.  
 
But much more needs to be done. With the little time left, we expect Members to engage fully and 
constructively to successfully conclude an agreement nex t year. For our group, a successful agreement 
must fulfil the two aspects of SDG 14.6 and MC11 mandates: to provide strong discipline that target 
those that cause overfishing and at the same time provide appropriate and effective special and 
differential t reatment for developing countries and LDCs. The latter, in our view, includes preserving 
the sovereign right of coastal States over the national jurisdictions ensuring that Members who 
currently have little or no capacity are not locked into the situation and in supporting the development 
of fisheries in small island developing States in line with SDG 14.7.  
 
On Agriculture, Development and Services Negotiations, the group aligns itself with the ACP's 
statement.  
 
As we have often done in the past, the Pacifi c Group reiterates its commitment to the multilateral 
trade rules -based system of the WTO which provides predictability and certainty for all WTO Members. 
In recent months, the rules and principles of the multilateral trading system have come under 
increas ing focus as trade tensions continue and discussions of WTO Reforms have grown. While we 
note that discussions of the reforms are continuing to take place in the margins of the WTO, we thank 
some of the proponents who have taken the time to come and explai n their initiatives to our Members 
including the Pacific Group. Our Group reiterates our statement in October that any discussion on WTO 
Reform should not leave anyone behind unless such discussion should provide for an inclusive and 
transparent process.  
 
51. St. Lucia (OECS)  
 
This statement is being delivered on behalf of the WTO Members of the OECS Economic Union. At the 
outset, we thank the Director -General for his report as well as the Chairs of the respective Negotiating 
Groups for their reports. Allow me to associate the members of the OECS Economic Union with the 
statements delivered by Haiti on behalf of CARICOM and Vanuatu on behalf of the ACP Group.  
 
We take note of the messages received from the meetings that have taken place globally including 
the re cently concluded G20. These meetings and the signals received have been particularly instructive 
on the question of WTO Reform. We further note that outcome communiqués from these encounters 
all strongly validate the need for a strong and effective multila teral trading system. More than most, 
OECS Member States need a well -functioning, open, transparent, predictable, inclusive and equitable 
multilateral trading system that represents and responds to the legitimate needs and concerns of all 
Members.  
 
Notwit hstanding the conversations taking place on WTO Reform within this house as well as in bilateral 
and plurilateral settings, all outcomes of these discussions should preserve the primacy of the 
multilateral trading system; preserve the consensus -based appro ach to the establishment of new WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 114 - 
 
  rules; and, should not add to or diminish from the balance of rights and responsibilities without that 
explicit consent of the entire Membership. To this end, these conversations have to be brought back 
to the full Membershi p if they have any semblance of legitimacy.  
 
While it is right to focus attention on solving the logjam related to the appointment of Appellate Body 
Members, it is vital that other long -standing and unaddressed issues be also considered including the 
non-implementation of rulings of the Appellate Body – and here, I speak specifically of a case of high 
importance to one of our OECS Members States – Antigua and Barbuda – an Appellate Ruling made 
in their favour since 2007. It refers to an online gaming c ase brought by Antigua and Barbuda against 
the United States. We believe that in cases such as this, the credibility and legitimacy of the WTO 
system is being called into question.  
 
Engagement on existing issues related to the Dispute Settlement Body shoul d not foreclose 
engagement on the broader reform of the Dispute Settlement Understanding with the view to making 
the system work more equitably for all Members. While we accept that some Members have identified 
both structural and procedural challenges wit h the existing system, we do not accept the need for a 
root and branch change to the multilateral trading system. Moreover, we do not see the need to 
fundamentally reshape the balance between the rights and responsibilities of Members. The OECS will 
contin ue to work constructively to achieve the goals and objectives of this organization and to deliver 
meaningful development enhancing outcomes.  
 
Moving beyond systemic concerns, permit me to quickly share my impressions of some of the reports 
tabled earlier t oday. On fisheries subsidies, we would like to thank the Chair of the Negotiating Group 
on Rules for his hard work and consultation in establishing the forward -looking programme. In 
concrete terms, given the intensification of work in 2019 in varying confi gurations and formats, we 
urge Members to convene meetings sequentially and not in parallel given the need to secure an 
inclusive and transparent process. Such inclusivity will allow all Members to contribute to finding a 
platform on which a final agreemen t can be established ahead of the 2019 deadline. The fisheries 
sector in the OECS is primarily artisanal, subsistence and small scale in nature. We therefore support 
the development of rules that proscribe harmful fisheries practices while prescribing suff icient policy 
space for the development of our fisheries sector. Given the importance of finding a landing zone on 
this issue before the end of 2019, we urge that the Secretariat make every effort to support the 
participation of capital -based experts who c an assist us with the heavy lifting in the first half of next 
year. 
 
On Agriculture, we note the active engagement of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session 
and thank the Chair for his efforts aimed at fostering much needed progress. We urge howev er that 
the development dimension including SVEs specific flexibilities settled under the draft negotiating text 
be given equal treatment and priority and fully integrated into the substance of ongoing negotiations.  
 
On process, the OECS would like to exp ress concern with the scheduling of important meetings. 
Overlapping and parallel meetings make it difficult for small delegations like ours to meaningfully 
participate. Allow me through the Director -General to request that the Secretariat work with the 
Chairpersons of the various Negotiating Groups and Committees to make every effort to avoid 
convening meetings in a manner that make it impossible for the participation of small delegations.  
 
Small Island Developing States like the OECS Islands should be affo rded special treatment beyond 
what is currently available under existing rules. SVEs should therefore be provided with flexibilities 
commensurate with their acute vulnerability to environmental and climate change shocks and hazards. 
We note with appreciati on the analytical work being undertaken by the WTO Secretariat on the link 
between environmental risk and trade. We therefore urge the establishment of a matrix such as a 
vulnerability index that can be used to establish baselines for enhanced flexibility to climate change 
vulnerable islands. The overnight destruction of the economies of the OECS Islands like Dominica and 
Barbuda is a clear demonstration of the significant threat and impact of climate change that result in 
disruption caused to economic acti vity and trade with the rest of the world. The international 
community led by the WTO must take concrete action to address what is quickly becoming a survival 
issue for Small Island Developing States. We therefore call on Members to work towards establishi ng 
safeguards that could be triggered after a catastrophic natural disaster that would allow sufficient 
policy space for recovery. We also urge that new rules support the building of economic and trade 
resilience in Small Island Developing States like the OECS.  
 WT/GC/M/175  
 
- 115 - 
 
  Finally, as we bring 2018 to a close, we look forward to renewed engagement and vigour in 2019 on 
issues of common concern to the entire Membership. As always, the OECS will play its part in that 
process.    
 
52. Dominican Republic  
 
The Dominican Republ ic has shown its firm support for the multilateral trading system ever since the 
beginning of the restructuring of the system in the post -war period under the GATT 1947. Our country 
acceded to this legal instrument in 1950 and participated as a founding Me mber of the WTO.  
 
Since then, there have been many moments of discouragement and crisis – particularly in the period 
between the Tokyo and Doha Rounds. Yet the determination of all the countries joining the multilateral 
framework has led to a number of ach ievements, despite the current system's flaws.  
 
Nevertheless, the international stage has changed considerably. And yet, over and above trade 
disputes, we are all driven by the commitments made in our respective countries, which trust that we 
will be capab le of maintaining a system of international relations consistent with new requirements 
and challenges – one that has the principal aim of ensuring the steady advancement of all the peoples 
that form part of it.  
 
We must therefore, before the end of the fir st quarter of 2019, review all the work that has remained 
pending since the Eleventh Ministerial Conference in Buenos Aires. The commitment to finalise an 
agreement on fisheries subsidies in 2019 is urgent and unavoidable, and we support efforts to provide  
funding for capital -based experts from developing countries so that these countries can participate 
more fully in the negotiations. We are pleased to see that the Working Group on MSMEs is making 
progress in respect of its agenda.  
 
One of the main priorit ies is to resolve the situation in the Appellate Body by filling its vacancies, 
thereby preventing the dispute settlement system from falling into a state of paralysis that will cause 
irreversible harm to the multilateral trading system.  
 
The need to reform the system of multilateral rules is clear. But the reform of this system must also 
strengthen the commitments undertaken in the context of the WTO -GATT in areas such as special and 
differential treatment for developing countries, which restore the b alance required in the face of the 
diversity of economic development.  
 
Efforts made to achieve greater transparency must be accompanied by substantial reforms in 
agriculture, and also be bolstered by effective monitoring in the organization's day -to-day wo rk so as 
to ensure effective compliance with existing rules and with those that may result from the reform 
process. In this respect, while we agree that transparency and the fulfilment of notification obligations 
must be improved, we do not believe that it  would be appropriate to penalise developing countries 
through administrative sanctions, as this type of measure only serves to aggravate situations of non -
compliance.  
 
The dispute settlement mechanism must continue its work, without prejudice to any other  creative 
means that may arise in that area leading to early solutions or preventing possible conflicts through 
appropriate consultations and good offices.  
 
In short, the pursuit of reform must not affect the progress that we all hope to achieve through th e 
Doha Agenda and any subsequent decisions that may be adopted during this extended round of 
negotiations, which began in Doha and which will have lasted two decades by the time we reach the 
Twelfth Ministerial Conference.  
 
It therefore falls to all WTO Me mber countries to focus our efforts, at an early stage, on the work 
outlined at MC11 and on that referred to in the reports submitted at today's key meeting, some of 
which constitute a mere minimum to be achieved, until other crucial issues are resolved, a s we hope 
they will be, at the next Ministerial Conference in 2020 and thereafter.  
 
 
__________