RESTRICTED  
  
WT/GC/M/160  
 
23 February 2016  
(16-1107)  Page: 1/31  
General Council 
30 November and 7 December 2015    
 
 MINUTES OF THE MEETING 
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 30 NOVEMBER AND 7 DECEMBER 2015 
Chairperson: H.E. Mr Fern ando de Mateo (Mexico) 
At the outset, the Chairman, on behalf of the General Council, welcomed the Republic of 
Kazakhstan, which formally became the 162nd Member of the WTO community on 30 November.  
 During the course of the meeting, the Chairman , the Director-General and several delegations 
bade farewell to Ambassador Yoichi Otabe (Japan) and Ambassador Marion Williams (Barbados) 
who were leaving their post at the WTO, and expressed appreciation for their valuable contribution 
during their time as Permanent Representatives.  
Subjects discussed:
1 
1   REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE .................... 3  
2   IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI OU TCOMES – STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN ........... 7  
3   WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF 
THE DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMI TTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT ............... 8  
4   THE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE AS PECTS OF COTTON - PERIODIC REPORT 
BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL ............................................................................................ 9  
5   FOSTERING PARTICIPATION OF MICRO, SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES (MSMES) IN REGIONAL AND GLOBAL MARKETS – COMMUNICATION FROM BRUNEI DARUSSALAM, LAO PDR, MALAYSIA, THE PHILIPPINES AND 
SINGAPORE .................................................................................................................... 10
 
6   TENTH SESSION OF THE MINISTERIAL CO NFERENCE ................................................ 14  
6.1   Request for Observer Status by Palestine to the Tenth Session of the Ministerial 
Conference .................................................................................................................... . 14 
6.2   Attendance of Observers from Inte rnational Intergovernm ental Organizations ................... 14 
6.3   Statement by  the Chairman ....................................................................................... 15 
6.3.1   TRIPS Non-violation and situation complaints ............................................................. 15 
6.3.2   Work Programme on Electronic  Commerce ................................................................ 15 
7   REVIEW OF THE EXEMPTION PROVID ED UNDER PARAGRAPH 3 OF GATT 1994 ......... 16  
8   TRIPS COUN CIL MATTERS ......................................................................................... 18  
8.1   Review under Paragraph 8 of the Decisi on on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of 
the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health – Report of the Council 
for TRIPS ........................................................................................................................ 18 
8.2   Proposal for a Decision on an Exte nsion of the Period for the Acceptance by 
Members of the Protocol Amen ding the TRIP S Agreement ...................................................... 18 
9   WTO ACCESSIONS: 2015 ANNUAL REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL  – 
STATEMENT BY DIRE CTOR-GENER AL ............................................................................. 19  
                                               
1 The proposed agenda was circulated in WT/GC/W/711. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 2 - 
 
 10   DERESTRICTION OF HISTORICAL BILATERAL NEGOTIATING DOCUMENTS OF 
THE TOKYO ROUND – DR AFT DECISI ON ......................................................................... 21  
11   WAIVERS UNDER ARTICLE IX  OF THE WTO AGREEMENT ......................................... 22  
11.1   Introduction of Harmonized System 2002 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Dr aft Decision ............................................................................................. 22 
11.2   Introduction of Harmonized System 2007 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Dr aft Decision ............................................................................................. 22 
11.3   Introduction of Harmonized System 2012 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Dr aft Decision ............................................................................................. 22 
11.4   United States – African Growth  Opportunity Act – Draft Decision ................................... 22 
11.5   Least Developed Country Members – Obligations under Article 70.8 and 
Article 70.9 of the TRIPS Agreement with respect to pharmaceutical products – Draft 
Decision ...................................................................................................................... ... 22 
11.6   REVIEW OF WAIVERS PURSUANT TO  ARTICLE IX:4 OF THE WTO AG REEMENT ................. 24 
11.6.1   Preferential Treatment to Services and Service Suppliers of Least-developed 
countries, granted on 17 December  2011 until 17 December 2026 .......................................... 24 
11.6.2   Kimberley Process Certification Scheme for Rough Diamonds, granted on 
12 December 2012 until 31  December  2018  ........................................................................ 24 
11.6.3   European Union - Application of Auto nomous Preferential Treatment to the West 
Balkans, granted on 30 November 2011 until 31 December 2016 ............................................ 24 
11.6.4   Cuba – Article XV:6 of GATT 1994, Extension of Waiver, granted on 
14 February 2012 until 31 December 2016 .......................................................................... 24 
12   COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION - REPORT ON 
MEETINGS OF OCTOBER AND NOVEMB ER 2015 .............................................................. 24  
13   WTO PENS ION PLAN ............................................................................................... 25  
13.1   Management Board – Election of a Member – Proposal by the Chairman of the 
General Counc il ...............................................................................................................  25 
13.2   Amendment to  the Regulations ................................................................................. 26 
14   INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE UN CTAD/WTO - REPORT OF THE JOINT 
ADVISORY GROUP ON ITS 49TH SESSION  ....................................................................... 26  
15   REVIEW OF WT O ACTIVITI ES .................................................................................. 27  
15.1   General Council, Dispute Settlement Body, and Trade Policy Review Body ....................... 27 
15.2   Sector al Councils .................................................................................................... 27 
15.3   Committees on Trade and Development, Trade and Environment, Balance-of-
Payments Restrictions, Budget, Finance and Administration, and Regional Trade 
Agreements ....................................................................................................................  27 
15.4   Working Groups on Trade, Debt and Finance  and Trade and Transfer of 
Technology .................................................................................................................... . 27 
15.5   Committees under the Pl urilateral Trad e Agreements ................................................... 27 
16   APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS TO WTO BODIES – ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE 
CHAIRMAN PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 7.1(A) OF THE GUIDELINES ............................. 27  
17   ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES FOR MEMBERS IN ARREARS – STATEMENT BY 
THE CHAIRMAN .............................................................................................................. 28  
ANNEX 1 - 19   STATEMENT BY THE HOLY SEE (OBSERVER) ON THE REPORT BY 
THE CHAIRMAN OF THE TR ADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITT EE (AGENDA ITEM 1) ............ 29  
ANNEX 2 - 21   STATEMENT BY MONTENEGRO ON THE REVIEW OF WAIVERS 
PURSUANT TO ARTICLE IX :4 OF THE WTO AGREEMENT (AGENDA ITEM 11.F) ................ 31  
  WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 3 - 
 
  1  REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE TRADE NEGOTI ATIONS COMMITTEE 
1.1.  At the 30 November meeting, the Chairman recalled his announcement at the meetings at 
the level of Heads of Delegation on 24 and 27 November, and proposed to suspend the 
consideration of item 1, and to revert back to it at a later date before leaving for Nairobi. He also 
noted that some of the deliverables for Nairobi in  the areas of regular work would be dealt with 
under other items of the agenda. He trusted that it was acceptable to delegations and moved to the consideration of item 2. 
1.2.  At the reconvened meeting on 7 December, the Chairman recalled that, at the 30 November 
meeting, the General Council had suspended the consideration of item 1 and had agreed to 
reconvene at a later date to allow work on the identified potential Nairobi deliverables to further advance and to continue the discussions on the draft text of the Ministerial Declaration. Since 
30 November, work had continued on the potential deliverables and on the discussions on the 
Ministerial Declaration text in four meetings at the level of Heads of Delegation held in Room W – on 2, 4, 5 and 6 December. 
1.3.  The representative of Barbados, on beha lf of the ACP, introduced two papers: one on 
Preserving Flexibilities in favour of Developing Countries2 and the other on the Establishment of a 
Work Programme on Non-Tariff Barriers in the Committee on Trade and Development3. The first 
paper was prepared to seek Special and Differential Treatment for Developing Countries, an 
integral part of all the negotiations in the past, and to request for a commitment that the flexibilities would continue to form part of the negotiations in the future. It also set out the principle behind the flexibilities that any new development should be continued in a framework 
relevant to a particular context such as when there would be a lowering of the level of ambition. In 
that case, adjustments should be made according to any agreement or any other formula that would be appropriate at that time without undermining the existing flexibilities. Modifications 
should thus be done proportionate to the level of  ambition that would be determined. With respect 
to the second paper, the submission related to a Work Programme on Non-Tariff Barriers in the CTD. Previous studies by the WTO had indicated that non-tariff barriers hindered trade more than 
tariffs as provided in the organization's 2012 study, among others. The same study had also 
indicated that developing countries had been the ones most adversely affected by NTBs. The ACP's paper had therefore suggested a need for a study to evaluate the impact of NTBs on developing country Members particularly on those that adversely affected exports and to consider a possible 
solution to address the issue. 
1.4.  The representative of Switzerland drew attention to the joint communication
4 co-sponsored 
by 29 developing and developed Members5 – spanning a broad range of the WTO. Those Members 
expressed their deep concerns at the situation WTO found itself in a few days before the Nairobi 
Ministerial Conference. They emphasized the vita l importance of the WTO’s negotiating function 
and called on the Membership to overcome rema ining differences to achieve meaningful and 
balanced results at MC10. They also noted the significantly diverging perspectives in WTO with 
respect to the outstanding DDA issues. They urged all Members to commit at MC10 to a realistic course towards outcomes on DDA issues and to maintain the pre-eminence of the WTO as the global forum for trade. 
1.5.  The Chairman then invited the Director-General, as Chairman of the TNC, to report on the 
TNC's activities since the last such report had been made to the General Council. 
1.6.  The Director-General, Chairman of the TNC6, noted that a lot of work still needed to be done. 
The key task for Members was to keep on advancing their work on the potential Nairobi 
deliverables and on the text of the Ministerial Declaration. He recalled that at the October meeting of the General Council, he had reported that progress on some key issues – domestic support and 
market access in agriculture, NAMA and services, continued to prove extremely difficult. He had 
                                               
2 The paper was circulated in document WT/GC/W/709 – TN/C/W/70 – TN/AG/W/10 – TN/MA/W/143 – 
TN/S/W/62. 
3 The paper was circulated in document WT/GC/W/710 – TN/C/W/71 – WT/COMTD/W/215. 
4 The communication was subsequently circulated in document WT/MIN(15)/10 – WT/GC/176. 
5 Australia; Brunei Darussalam; Ca nada; Chile; Colombia; Costa Rica; Fiji; Hong Kong, China; Iceland; 
Israel; Kenya; the Republic of Korea; Lao PDR; Liechtenstein; Malaysia; Mexico; Myanmar; New Zealand; 
Norway; Pakistan; Panama; Paraguay; Peru; Russian Federation; Singapore; Switzerland; Chinese Taipei; 
Thailand and Turkey. 
6 The Director-General's statement was subsequently circulated in JOB/GC/89. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 4 - 
 
 therefore suggested that it had been time for Members to start working intensely on issues where 
there appeared to be more convergence and which could provide potential deliverables for MC10. 
1.7.  Since that report to the General Council, a range of meetings and consultations had taken 
place in respective negotiating bodies, by Chairs in different configurations or through Friends of 
the TNC Chair. In addition, Members had continued to convene meetings themselves and he had 
continued to hold his own consultations. Written reports on those issues had been circulated by respective Chairs or Friends of the TNC Chair which could be consulted for more details. The TNC 
had reporting obligations to the General Council – and through the General Council to the 
Ministerial Conference. Therefore written reports had been circulated by all Chairs of bodies 
established by the TNC under their own responsibilities. The reports had been circulated in the following official documents: 
a. the Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture in document TN/AG/32; 
b. the Negotiating Group on Market Access in document TN/MA/28; 
c. the Special Session of the Council for Trade in Services in document TN/S/40; 
d. the Negotiating Group on Rules in document TN/RL/27; 
e. the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Development in document 
TN/CTD/31; 
f. the Special Session of the Council for TRIPS in document TN/IP/23; 
g. the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment in document TN/TE/23; 
and, 
h. the Special Session of the Dispute Settlement Body in document TN/DS/28. 
1.8.  In addition, written reports had been circulated on LDC issues by Friends of the TNC Chair in 
the following official documents: 
a. a report on Preferential Rules of Origin for LDCs by Ambassador Steffen Smidt in 
document TN/C/17; and, 
b. a report by Ambassador Eyjólfsson on the LDC Services Waiver in document TN/C/18. 
1.9.  He had also circulated a report on Duty-Free and Quota-Free Market Access for LDCs in 
document TN/C/16. 
1.10.  On the potential deliverables, in Agriculture, a range of issues were under consideration for 
Nairobi. The Chair of the Special Session of the Committee on Agriculture had held several consultations on the issue of the SSM on which the G-33 had circulated two proposals. The 
consultations on the most recent of those had continued to show entrenched and widely divergent 
positions. Proponents of the SSM had stressed that they considered the SSM to be a balancing element in relation to other potential outcomes for Nairobi. Other Members had maintained their 
position that an outcome on SSM would not be possible in the absence of a broader outcome on 
agriculture market access. Given those sustained divergent views, the negotiations on the issue 
had reached an impasse, but work in various formats continued. 
1.11.  The Chair had also held several consultations on the separate issue of Public Stockholding. 
There had been a new submission from the G-33 and also one from Australia, Paraguay and Canada. G-33 Members had called for a permanent solution to be adopted in Nairobi, citing the General Council Decision of 28 November 2014. They had noted that the recent G-33 proposal 
sought to address the systemic concerns of Member s. Others considered that the proposal still did 
not adequately address a variety of concerns, both systemic and trade-related. The latest consultations based on the proposed texts had not so far taken them much closer to convergence 
but as with the SSM, work continued in various formats.  WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 5 - 
 
  1.12.  On Export Competition, the Chair had initiated a text-based negotiation process using the 
Rev.4 text as a basis and taking also into account textual proposals by Members. So far those consultations had not likewise led to significant convergence. Among other issues, specific substantive concerns continued to be expressed about the timeframes and conditions envisaged 
for the elimination of export subsidies, repayment terms in the area of export finance, coverage of 
self-financing provisions, special and differential treatment, transparency provisions, and monetization in food aid – a large list of i ssues which remained unresolved. Intensive work 
continued on Export Competition as on the other issues. 
1.13.  On Cotton, the C-4 had circulated a proposal which had been introduced in the Special 
Session. Delegations had moved into a text-based negotiation based on the proposal including its list of products of interest and on written inputs  from Members. On the basis of those negotiations 
a draft text had been circulated by the Chair on his own responsibility. It was close to being 
finalized for consideration at Nairobi, leaving options open on the most controversial issues for Ministers to consider and decide upon. Paragraph 11 of the Bali Decision on Cotton also provided 
that a progress report on the implementation of the trade-related components of cotton should be 
submitted by the Director-General at each Minist erial Conference. He would therefore shortly be 
circulating the report which would be concise and factual. 
1.14.  In relation to transparency issues, in Services, the Council for Trade in Services in Special 
Session was considering two recently submitted proposals on possible outcomes regarding transparency in services. Those consisted of a submission by Australia and Canada on transparency in domestic regulation and a subm ission by India on services transparency in 
measures relating to temporary entry of natural persons. An informal meeting to discuss those 
proposals was scheduled to take place on 8 December. 
1.15.  In the Rules area, the Group had continued to work intensively with efforts to sharpen and 
consolidate proposals for outcomes notably in fisheries subsidies and in anti-dumping and 
countervailing measures. The Group had received new proposals the previous week and was continuing to discuss them. However, the Group had not yet seen convergence on the proposals 
and that environment had not yet contributed to a high level of engagement.  
1.16.  On the S&D Agreement Specific Proposals, work continued on the basis of the most recent 
submission made by the G-90. On some proposals, the text-based negotiations had somewhat advanced although a lot more work was still required – while more significant gaps remained on 
others. Members should continue their efforts with an open mind and a sense of flexibility and 
accommodation to make progress. The Chair of the CTD Special Session intended to continue 
meeting in a small group format up to and including 8 December with the aim of further fine-
tuning text and endeavouring to finalize a potential package for Nairobi. 
1.17.  Concerning DFQF, as he had indicated in his written report, some progress had been made 
during the past few months in taking forward the issue. But Members would have to find common 
ground on the issue in case it was to be part of the developmental outcomes they were striving for 
at MC10. No specific textual proposal had currently  been tabled either by the LDC Group or by any 
of its Members. Submitting such proposal would be a crucial step.  
1.18.  With regard to LDCs and Services, he reca lled that Bangladesh, on behalf of the LDC Group, 
had circulated a draft Ministerial Decision. He had asked Ambassador Eyjólfsson to facilitate 
discussions on that item on his behalf. During informal consultations, delegations representing the LDCs and preference-granting Members had asked Ambassador Eyjólfsson to facilitate discussions 
by preparing a draft based on the LDC Group's pr oposal with a view to bridging gaps between 
delegations' positions and advancing the process. The draft had been issued in a document dated 
1 December 2015. Open-ended informal consultations on the text had taken place on 3 December, 
where Members had agreed that the Chairperson' s draft had presented an acceptable basis for 
further work. On that basis, Ambassador Eyjólfsson was continuing his consultations. 
1.19.  On LDC Rules of Origin, delegations were close to reaching an agreement on a draft 
ministerial decision, but that some additional consultations were still needed to get there. It was 
encouraging that there were potential outcomes on  the table for some of the issues. But there was 
still a long way to go in all areas. Work would be continuing on a number of those issues after the meeting and he hoped they could resume those co nversations as soon as possible so that they 
could go to Nairobi in better shape.  WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 6 - 
 
 1.20.  Regarding the work on the Ministerial Declaration for Nairobi, he recalled the discussion at 
the last General Council about the urgent need to address that issue – specifically what the 
declaration should cover and how Members should arrive at a text. He had appointed Ambassadors Gabriel Duque (Colombia), Harald Neple (Norway)  and Stephen Karau (Kenya) as his Facilitators 
on the Ministerial Declaration. The Facilitators had consulted extensively with delegations. Their 
report on those consultations set out the views across the Membership on the structure, elements and process to lead Members to a consensual text. There had been convergence early in the 
process on a "Bali-like" Declaration in three parts. The Facilitators' report had highlighted the 
urgent need to move to a text-based discussion. It had also been clear that textual proposals for the Declaration would come from Members themselves – that was the approach they had taken. Over 20 written proposals had been submitted by Members individually or in groups. The 
Facilitators' compilation of texts reflecting proposals submitted had been circulated to Members. 
That had been followed by a heading-by-heading co nsideration of the compilation in order to have 
a clear understanding of Members' reactions to other Members' proposals – and importantly where 
convergence could be possible and where more work  would be required to bridge differences. The 
Facilitators had then been requ ested to present a draft consolidated text to facilitate their 
discussions towards a consensual Ministerial Declaration. As instructed by Members, the text had 
not provided language on the most contentious issu es that had been identified by Members earlier 
in the process particularly the reaffirmation of the DDA and instructions on the way forward and new issues. The full Membership had been meeting over recent days including over the weekend to try to further streamline the text. The process would also continue after the meeting. He was also 
beginning to engage with Members in different configurations on the more contentious issues as 
he had outlined. His consultations would also continue after the meeting.  
1.21.  That was where Members stood that day. Th ere were only three outcomes from the regular 
work – on Small Economies; TRIPS Non-Violation and Situation Complaints and, E-Commerce. 
Three working days were left until Members starte d to leave Geneva to travel to Nairobi. They 
currently had no deliverables for Nairobi – either on the potential outcomes that they had 
identified or on the Ministerial Declaration. Beyond the written reports he had listed earlier, the 
General Council had nothing to transmit for the consideration of the Ministers in Nairobi. 
1.22.  Nevertheless, Members still had the chance of delivering some significant elements in the 
extremely limited time available. He urged them to seize the last opportunity to show the flexibility 
and political will that they needed. He had been asked about the process ahead of them – both in 
Geneva and in Nairobi. In Geneva they were going to have a very busy few days. The negotiating process would continue including through the work of the Chairs and through his work as Chair of 
the TNC – on the Ministerial Declaration in particular and regarding other deliverables to try to 
help the Chairs find convergence. Meetings would be held as necessary as things developed in a range of configurations and sometimes at very short notice.  
1.23.  In Nairobi, a lot would depend on what they leave Geneva with. They had three days to 
finalize their work and on that basis they would have to see what was ready for ministerial engagement. They should aim to present Ministers with documents for a yes/no decision – or if necessary with only a couple of outstanding issu es to resolve. All of those depended on the 
progress they would make over the following three days. A successful Ministerial Conference would 
be essential to support growth and developm ent for all Members and for the strength and 
credibility of the multilateral trading system. 
1.24.  The Chairman noted what the Director-General  had just said, "we still have a lot of work to 
do". That work entailed the very viability of the multilateral trading system – or its negotiating arm 
to say the least. All Members should thus devote all their energy to seek necessary consensus. In 
the previous days in Room W, there had been moments where the discussions had been 
unravelling and had been focusing on elements of no importance – a luxury they should no longer 
allow themselves. From that day on until Nairobi, they should focus on the essential matters. Secondary elements should remain secondary. It was the first time they would be holding a 
Ministerial Conference in Africa and it was the Ministerial Conference celebrating the Twentieth 
Anniversary of the WTO. Members should not discard those facts. He thus urged all of them, as Chairman of the General Council, to spare no efforts to ensure a successful Ministerial Conference. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 7 - 
 
  1.25.  The General Council took note of the Director-General's report, all the other statements7 
and the fact that work on the Nairobi deliverables and on a draft text of the Ministerial Declaration 
was continuing in the immediate next few days and any results from that work would be in front of the Ministers in Nairobi. 
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI OUTCOMES (G/RO/77) – STATEMENT BY THE 
CHAIRMAN 
2.1.  Before providing his report on the implemen tation of the Bali Outcomes, the Chairman invited 
the Director-General to take the floor and make a statement on the EIF pledging conference. 
2.2.  The Director-General said that the first ph ase of the EIF had delivered significant, tangible 
results for LDCs. When the second phase would come on-stream in January it would even be more 
efficient and results-driven. The pledging conference for the new phase would take place in Nairobi 
on the eve of the Ministerial Co nference. A successful pledging conference would be an important 
deliverable for LDCs. He urged existing and potential new donors to come forward in Nairobi and pledge their support. Assisting the LDCs to trade and to integrate into the multilateral trading 
system should be a priority and supporting the EIF was a practical way to advance that aim. 
2.3.  The Chairman
8 recalled that Members had had the agenda  item on implementation of the Bali 
outcomes since July 2014. All the reports that he – and his predecessor – had provided under that 
item had been circulated to delegations and were  reflected in the Annual Report of the General 
Council which Members would take up later in the agenda. The Annual Reports of all the subsidiary bodies reflected in detail the work they had cond ucted in the implementation of the Bali outcomes 
when appropriate. All the Annual Reports would be in front of the Ministers at MC10. He 
highlighted the importance of the work carried out by WTO regular Councils and Committees. He 
had met with the Chairs of all regular bodies on 9 November. The reports he had heard from them on their activities that year gave the picture of a busy and dynamic institution. The day-to-day 
business could not always be very visible or make the headlines but it was a fundamental 
component of the organization. He thanked the Chairs of regular bodies for their hard work that year and for the productive cooperation that he had enjoyed from them. 
2.4.  Regarding the Bali Outcomes, he would only focus on the implementation work carried out by 
regular bodies with respect to the Bali Decisions and not on the possible Nairobi outcomes in some of these issues which were then under discussion. Regarding the Bali decisions on regular work, the Council would take up TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints, the work programme on 
electronic commerce and small economies and the recommendations from the CTD in Dedicated 
Session under the succeeding agenda items. 
2.5.  Concerning Aid for Trade, the formal CTD Session and the Workshop on the 2030 Agenda for 
Sustainable Development held in October had been the last activities planned under the current 
Aid-for-Trade work programme. At the formal  Session, Members had agreed that a work 
programme for the 2016-2017 period would be developed after MC10. The CTD Chairperson had 
noted his intention to forward the new programme to the General Council under his own 
responsibility following past practice.  
2.6.  On Trade and Transfer of Technology, Me mbers had continued to discuss the relationship 
between trade and transfer of technology based on three briefings from Ecuador, the Philippines 
and Chinese Taipei on their experiences with inno vation, technology generation and its transfer. 
Deliberations in the Working Group also benefi ted from the findings of a WTO Workshop on 
Environmental Technology Dissemination held in  2013 and from the elements that had emerged 
from a Workshop held in June 2014. In parallel,  the Working Group had also proceeded with its 
deliberations on possible recommendations on the ba sis of a non-paper submitted earlier by India, 
Pakistan and the Philippines titled "Facilitating Access to Information on Appropriate Technology 
Sourcing – Steps to Increase Flows of Technology  to Developing Countries". In its Annual Report, 
the Working Group had recommended that it continued work to fully achieve its mandate. 
2.7.  With regard to the Monitoring Mechanism on Special and Differential Treatment, which 
operated in a Dedicated Session of the CTD, the Bali Decision stipulated that it had to serve as a 
                                               
7 A statement from the Holy See (Observer) on this it em is incorporated in the minutes of this meeting 
and can be found in Annex 1 of this document. 
8 The Chairman's statement was subsequently circulated in JOB/GC/88. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 8 - 
 
 focal point within the WTO to analyse and review the implementation of S&D provisions. Although 
four meetings of the Dedicated Session had been held since Bali, no written submissions from Members had been received. At the November Dedicated Session, the CTD Chairperson once again called on Members to make written submissions in order to make the Mechanism operational. 
2.8.  On DFQF market access for LDCs, he had mentioned in his previous report that a special 
meeting of the CTD had been held in September.  That meeting had provided an opportunity for 
Members to have an in ‑depth exchange on the issues involved with the implementation of DFQF 
market access for LDC products. Discussion on a possible way forward had focused on a "clinical 
examination" of the issues involved and possible impact arising from the implementation of DFQF market access for LDCs on the basis of a study to be prepared by the Secretariat. The CTD 
Chairperson had subsequently undertaken informal consultations with interested delegations to 
define the parameters of such a study. However, his consultations had not succeeded in finding convergence on the parameters. The CTD had conducted its annual DFQF review on the basis of a 
Secretariat report prepared in the context of the mandate given in the Bali DFQF Decision. 
2.9.  In relation to Rules of Origin for LDCs, the Committee on Rules of Origin had conducted its 
annual review on new developments in preferential rules of origin applicable to imports from LDCs, 
as mandated in the Bali Ministerial Decision. A re port of that review had been circulated for 
consideration by the General Council in document G/RO/77.   
2.10.  On the LDCs Services waiver, the Council for Trade in Services had received a total of 
19 notifications of preferences for LDC services  and service suppliers submitted by Canada; 
Australia; Norway; China; the Republic of Korea; Hong Kong, China; Chinese Taipei; Singapore; 
New Zealand; Switzerland; Japan; Mexico; Turkey; the United States; India; Chile; Iceland; Brazil; and the European Union. The Services Council had held a Dedicated Session on the Waiver on 
2November where the LDC Group had shared a deta iled assessment of the notifications received. 
Specific technical questions had also been asked and clarifications had been sought on each of the notifications submitted. It had been agreed th at Members would reply to the LDCs' questions 
bilaterally. At that Session, the Council had also approved preferences on measures going beyond 
GATS Article XVI contained in all notifications submitted before 2 November. As provided in the MC8 Waiver Decision, preferences going beyond Arti cle XVI had to be approved by the Council for 
Trade in Services. 
2.11.  Regarding Trade Facilitation, work had continued to progress. Members had submitted 
additional category A notifications bringing th eir overall number to 75. Several delegations had 
also completed their ratification process. Almost half of the instruments required for the Trade 
Facilitation Agreement to enter into force had be en received – a positive development that he 
hoped to see followed by additional ratification s. He equally hoped that Members would present 
their category B and C notifications in the not too distant future. 
2.12.  The General Council took note of the statements. 
3  WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 
DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMI TTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT 
(WT/COMTD/SE/9) 
3.1.  The Chairman recalled that in line with the framework and procedures agreed by the General 
Council in 2002, the Work Programme on Small Economies was a standing item on the General 
Council's agenda and the Committee on Trade and Development reported regularly to the Council 
on the progress of work in its Dedicated Sessions on  the subject. He drew attention to the Report 
submitted by the Committee on Trade and Development in Dedicated Session to the General Council in document WT/COMTD/SE/9 and invited Ambassador Juan Esteban Aguirre (Paraguay), 
Chairperson of the CTD, to report on developments in the area. 
3.2.  Ambassador Juan Esteban Aguirre (Paraguay), Chairperson of the Dedicated Session of the 
CTD, said that since his last report to the General Council the Dedicated Session on Small 
Economies had held one formal meeting on 29 October. At that meeting, Members had continued 
their discussion of the WTO Secretariat paper on the "Challenges and Opportunities Experienced by 
Small Economies when linking into Global Value Chains in Trade in Goods and Services". They had also discussed a compilation paper and their report to the General Council. The latter included a 
section on "future work" and recommendations for Ministers. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 9 - 
 
  3.3.  With respect to the Secretariat paper contained in document WT/COMTD/SE/W/31, Members 
had focused their discussion on the agri-food and se afood sectors and participated in presentations 
given by the Standards and Trade Development Faci lity (STDF) and the International Trade Centre 
(ITC). Both presentations had examined the ro le and effects of sanitary and phytosanitary 
measures and other public and private standards on food and seafood exports of small economies. 
There had been a good general discussion and exch ange of views about the importance of meeting 
compliance requirements through certification according to national and international standards. 
3.4.  Members had also taken note of a revised compilation paper in WT/COMTD/SE/W/22/Rev.7 
which compiled the proposals submitted by the SVEs to the negotiating groups and other WTO 
bodies since 2002 and also listed decisions and recommendations taken on their behalf.  
3.5.  The developments that had taken place during the year were reflected in the Dedicated 
Session's report to the General Council. Members had discussed the contents of the report and had 
agreed to its adoption. The report had since been circulated as WT/COMTD/SE/9. The report had a section titled "Future Work" – the section where the Dedicated Session of the CTD proposed that 
the General Council would recommend to the Tenth Ministerial Conference for Ministers to reaffirm 
their commitment to the Work Programme on Small Economies and to take note of all the work conducted to date. The Dedicated Session also asked Ministers to take note of the work carried out 
since 2013 including that on the challenges and opportunities faced by small economies when 
linking into global value chains in trade in goods and services. Finally, it proposed that the General Council would recommend to Ministers to instruct the Secretariat to conduct further work on global value chains and small economies as well as on the challenges small economies experienced in 
their efforts to reduce trade costs particularly in the area of trade facilitation. The Dedicated 
Session therefore requested the General Council to forward those recommendations to the Ministerial Conference. 
3.6.  The representative of Guatemala, on beha lf of the SVEs, thanked the Membership for their 
continued support to the Work Programme on Small Economies. The SVEs Group gave great 
importance to the work programme. The future work of the CTD Dedicated Session would be 
fruitful especially in the topics agreed by Member s regarding the challenges and opportunities that 
small economies faced when linking into global value chains and the challenges that their economies faced in their efforts to reduce their cost especially in trade facilitation. 
3.7.  The Chairman said that in light of Ambassador Aguirre's report that the CTD in Dedicated 
Session had agreed to forward its recommendations  for future work to the General Council for 
submission to Ministers, he proposed that the General Council agree to forward the recommendations contained in paras 3.2 and 3.3 of WT/COMTD/SE/9 to MC10 for Ministers' 
Decision, constituting one of the outcomes to be reflected in Part II of the Ministerial Declaration. 
3.8.  The General Council so agreed
9 and took note of the report in WT/COMTD/SE/9 and of the 
statements. 
4  THE DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE ASPECTS OF COTTON - PERIODIC REPORT BY THE 
DIRECTOR-GENERAL (WT/GC/175 – WT/CFMC/DG/7 – WT/MIN(15)/8) 
4.1.  The Chairman recalled that in its July 2004 Decision, the General Council, inter alia, had 
taken note of the bilateral, multilateral, and regi onal efforts to make progress on the development 
assistance aspects of the Cotton Initiative. The Council had instructed the Secretariat to continue 
to work with the development community and to  provide the Council with periodic reports on 
relevant developments. The Council had also instru cted the Director-General to consult with the 
relevant international organizations, including the Bretton Woods Institutions, the Food and 
Agriculture Organization and the International Trade Centre, to direct effectively existing 
programmes and any additional resources towards development of the economies where cotton 
had vital importance. The Bali Decision had invite d the Director-General to continue to provide 
periodic reports on the matter and he invited Deputy Director-General Shark to introduce the Director-General's report. 
4.2.  Deputy Director-General Shark, on behalf of the Director-General, introduced the Seventh 
Periodic Report on the Development Assistance aspects of Cotton. The report had been circulated 
on 27 November in document WT/GC/175. The cotton dossier continued to remain a priority on 
                                               
9 The draft decision was forwarded to the Minist erial Conference in document WT/MIN(15)/W/24. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 10 - 
 
 the Director-General's agenda the developments of which were closely monitored by him. Since 
the previous report, progress continued to be ma de on the important aspect of the work. That 
progress had been duly reflected in the latest version of the Evolving Table on Cotton Development Assistance which was the main instrument for the work in the Consultative Framework Mechanism.  
4.3.  The figures in the Evolving Table demonstrated that there had been acceleration in the 
implementation of projects and programmes – thereby reducing the gap between commitments 
and disbursements. That was largely due to the enhanced coordination and information exchange 
between providers and recipients of development assistance within the Consultative Framework 
Mechanism. He extended the Director-General's appreciation to the Members of the development 
community for their engagement in the consultative process particularly: Australia, Canada, the European Union and several of its Member States, Japan, Switzerland, and the United States. He 
also extended the Director-General's commendation to Brazil, China and India for their significant 
contributions on the platform of South-South Cooperation for Cotton Development Assistance. The sustained support from a wide range of multilateral institutions was also greatly appreciated. That 
engagement had helped consolidate a strong and lasting partnership between the providers of 
development assistance for cotton and its beneficiaries.  
4.4.  The Consultative Framework Mechanism had also been discussing initiatives aimed at 
fostering regional integration of the cotton sector in Africa. Concrete projects in that regard would 
be submitted shortly. The cotton proponents, on their side, continued to update the membership 
on their efforts to reform their cotton sector, as reflected in the latest revision of the table on Domestic Cotton Sector Reforms. The sustained engagement of WTO Members and participants in 
the Consultative Framework Mechanism on Cotton was very encouraging. It was a positive step 
forward in their efforts to consolidate the development dimension of the multilateral trading system. The dedicated discussions in relation to the trade-related aspects of cotton were 
enhancing transparency and monitoring trade-rela ted developments in that sector. The Director-
General hoped to see further progress on trade- related components of cotton including in the 
context of the forthcoming Nairobi Ministerial Conference. 
4.5.  The General Council took note of the Director-General's report and of the statement. 
5  FOSTERING PARTICIPATION OF MICRO, SMALL AND MEDIUM ENTERPRISES (MSMES) 
IN REGIONAL AND GLOBAL MARKETS – COMMUNICATION FROM BRUNEI DARUSSALAM, LAO PDR, MALAYSIA, THE PHILIPPINES AND SINGAPORE (WT/GC/W/708 AND 
WT/GC/W/708/ADD.1) 
5.1.  The Chairman recalled the discussion on the issue of participation of MSMEs in regional and 
global markets at the October General Council meeting following a communication by the 
Philippines, Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam and Lao PDR. Following that discussion, the proponents 
had revised their proposal which was then before the General Council in document WT/GC/W/708.   He also noted that Singapore had requested to be a co-sponsor as indicated in Addendum 1 to the 
communication. He invited the delegation of the Philippines to introduce the draft proposal. 
5.2.  The representative of the Philippines noted that at the last meeting of the General Council on 
8 October, the Philippines joined by Malaysia, Brunei Darussalam, and Lao PDR had submitted a 
proposal in document WT/GC/W/702 on "Fostering  the Participation of Micro, Small and Medium 
Enterprises (MSMEs) in Regional and Global Market s." At that time, several delegations had taken 
the floor to indicate their interest in and support  for the proposal. Those interventions had served 
to validate the rationale behind the proposal, namely: importance of MSMEs in national economies, 
and need to enhance existing dialogue on MSMEs in WTO. 
5.3.  Other delegations had also taken the floor to express some concerns. While not completely 
rejecting the idea, they had stricken a cautionary note on the possible implications of the proposal 
on the covered agreements. In the interval and in the lead up to that day's meeting, the 
proponents had intensified their outreach to the Members. The result of those efforts was a modified version of the proposal which they were  submitting as document WT/GC/W/708. He was 
pleased to report that Singapore had joined as a co-sponsor of the modified proposal. 
5.4.  The proposal as modified highlighted thei r very modest aims, namely: they were not even 
starting a discussion on MSMEs. As they had pointed out before, there were already ongoing 
discussions on MSMEs in WTO. All they were asking was a more focused discussion as against its 
being currently diffused among several fora and a more sustained discussion as against its WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 11 - 
 
  sporadic treatment at that time. If they were no t even starting a conversation, much less did they 
want ne g otiations  on s p ec if ic  d is c ip l in e s  on M SM Es . Al l the y w e re  as king  was  a forum to s hare national experiences and perspectives on MSMEs and the opportunities and challenges they faced 
in integrating into regional and global markets. On those very modest goals but with a lot of hope 
in their hearts, he commended their revised proposal to the Members for their kind consideration 
and approval. 
5.5.  The representative of Chile conveyed Chile' s strong support to the proposal submitted by the 
Philippines, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Lao PDR and Singapore – in line with the priorities of the 
Chilean government. Members should give it the necessary space in the organization because the development of MSMEs had redistributive effects an d supported the most vulnerable sectors of the 
population including the youth and women. Such initiatives would enable them to address the 
challenges of MSMEs and those connected to join ing global value chains. Chile hoped they would 
continue to consider innovative and forward-looking proposals at the WTO. 
5.6.  The representative of Turkey noted that the trade priorities of Turkey's G-20 presidency for 
2015 had included fostering of the integration of SMEs into global value chains. Turkey shared the 
assessment of the proponents relating to the impo rtant role that MSMEs could play for achieving 
inclusive, economic growth and a robust global trade. His delegation supported the communication 
made by Brunei Darussalam, Lao PDR, Malaysia , Singapore and the Philippines in document 
WT/GC/W/708 and the attached Draft Ministerial Decision for MC10. 
5.7.  The representative of Kenya supported the proposed draft Ministerial Decision presented by 
the Philippines on behalf of the co-sponsors on fostering the participation of micro, small, and 
medium enterprises in regional and global markets for consideration and adoption at the Tenth 
Ministerial Conference in Nairobi. There was no doubt that MSMEs played an important role in 
economic development through employment and income generation for both the developed and 
developing country Members. For the developing an d least-developed country Members, the role of 
MSMEs was more critical as they had the potential for improving income distribution, employment creation, poverty reduction and export growth as could be seen from their contribution to Kenya's 
economic growth and development. Regional and global value chains had created enormous trade 
opportunities. WTO work could contribute in promoting international cooperation and thereby foster the participation of MSMEs in regional and global value chains and become powerful drivers 
of economic growth and development. 
5.8.  The representative of India thanked the de legations of the Philippines, Malaysia, Lao PDR, 
Brunei Darussalam and Singapore for their revised submission aimed at fostering MSMEs 
participation in regional and global markets. Indi a appreciated the efforts made by the proponents 
in the last meeting of the Council to reach out to delegations including India to discuss various 
aspects of the proposal. Being important contributo rs to India's trade and economy, MSMEs played 
a very important role in India. India's MSMEs in the organized manufacturing sector accounted for 
about 45% of output and 40% of exports. A large number of MSMEs were small and micro 
industries which fell in the unorganized sector and hence remained not adequately documented. India had substantial interest in the proposal su bmitted by the Philippines and other co-sponsors 
given the role and strong contribution of MSMEs in  boosting economic growth. At the last meeting 
of the Council, India had underlined that the propos al carried some extensive horizontal and cross-
sectoral issues. It had also raised the systemic question whether WTO disciplines and flexibilities 
were at all capable of being useful to target part icular constituencies of a Member such as MSMEs. 
India believed that the WTO disciplines were not pred icated upon the size and type of entities. It 
had taken careful note of the remarks made by the Philippines. Indeed, India had discussed those 
and other issues bilaterally with the proponents but continued to have concerns on the revised 
proposal. India would therefore not be in a positi on to support a draft Ministerial Declaration on 
M S M E s  a t  t h a t  s t a g e .  A s  i t  h a d  i n d i c a t e d  a t  t h e  l a s t  m e e t i n g  o f  t h e  C o u n c i l  i n  O c t o b e r ,  a n  exploratory study could always be done without a Ministerial Declaration provided there was a consensus among Members. 
5.9.  The representative of South Africa thanke d the proponents for their revised proposal. South 
Africa recognized the importance of MSMEs in th e performance of Members' economies. Since the 
last meeting of the General Council, South Africa had consulted with the Philippines on their MSME 
proposal. In those engagements it had shared its concerns on the proposal notably that the 
parameters of information exchange and sharing of  experiences as proposed had not been clearly 
defined. A decision on the issue would have far reaching implications for Members' work and 
further clarity on the parameters would be needed. While work on MSMEs could continue in its WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 12 - 
 
 current format, South Africa did not believe that the issue had reached the level of maturity to 
include it on the Ministers’ Agenda for a Decision at MC10 in Nairobi. South Africa wished to make it clear that it did not support the proposal that a Decision on MSMEs be taken by Ministers at MC10. 
5.10.  The representative of the European Union supported the proposal of Brunei Darussalam, Lao 
PDR, Malaysia, Singapore and the Philippines for a Ministerial Decision at MC10 that the General 
Council would consider an exchange of inform ation and experiences among Members on trade 
issues related to MSMEs. The EU also supported the proposed review of the Secretariat regarding 
all work done within the WTO and by other international organizations on trade-related issues relevant to MSMEs. 
5.11.  The representative of the United States commended the Philippines and the other co-
sponsors of the proposal for the way in which they had introduced the subject, for their 
collaborative approach in reaching out to other Members. In the United States' view, that was exactly how things should work in the house in terms of bringing in new ideas that were of interest 
to any Member. The US very much appreciated that  approach and it would be supportive of the 
kind of work that was outlined in the paper. 
5.12.  The representative of El Salvador thanked the Philippines for its statement and reiterated its 
interest in continuing to discuss the issues of MSMEs within the WTO framework in a more 
systematic fashion. As far as El Salvador was concerned, the integration of such enterprises in trade was a matter of top priority. El Salvador was thus open to continue discussing the issue with the proponents and other interested delegations. 
5.13.  The representative of the Bolivarian Repu blic of Venezuela thanked the proponents for 
tabling the revised text and their explanation on the proposal's details. Venezuela recognized the 
very important role played by MSMEs in their cont ribution to development particularly for the most 
vulnerable in the population. On the other hand, it noted that Members were looking at a 
Ministerial Conference where everything remained to be done. Time was not on their side, which 
was why Venezuela believed it would be difficult to  overburden an already complex. It was quite 
tight already and the proposal still needed to be better understood and further discussed by the 
membership. Venezuela was however very open to continue to look at it post-Nairobi to find solutions and a way to accommodate the issue and make sure it would fit in their regular work. 
5.14.  The representative of Guatemala joined all those who had expressed their support for the 
participation of MSMEs in regional and global ma rkets as put forward in the Declaration by the 
Philippines, Malaysia, Lao PDR, Brunei Darussalam and Singapore. 
5.15.  The representative of Japan was prepared to uphold the proposal after having heard all the 
explanations and clarifications of the paper put forward for their consideration. 5.16.  The representative of Cuba thanked the Philippines, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia, Lao PDR 
and Singapore for their contribution which was of great interest to all Members. However, along 
with South Africa, India and Venezuela, Cuba was concerned at beginning with that work as of 
Nairobi and believed that the document was not ripe yet, as the delegate of South Africa had pointed out. There was a lot of work to be dealt with, many pending issues in the run up to Nairobi which were of high priority. Members could continue working on the MSMEs issue in the General 
Council post-Nairobi. Cuba believed that the issue was not ripe enough to be dealt with in the 
upcoming Ministerial Conference. 
5.17.  The representative of Mexico thanked the Philippines for providing additional explanations 
regarding the joint proposal for Members' consideration. Mexico had looked closely on the MSMEs 
issue and did not think it ought to be controversial. In fact, it was of interest to all. Mexico would thus join all those who had supported the proposal in the hope that it could be adopted. 
5.18.  The representative of the Plurinational St ate of Bolivia thanked the Philippines, Malaysia, 
Lao PDR, Brunei Darussalam and Singapore for th e proposal. MSMEs constituted an important 
sector within Bolivia's domestic economy particularly in generating jobs. Bolivia had a whole set of policies under way to support that important sector of its economy. But on the kind of work done 
at the WTO, it was important to acknowledge that not all Members and their SMEs were at the 
same level. SMEs of developing country Members were different from those of developed country 
Members in terms of their size, technology and sources of funding, among others. Like other WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 13 - 
 
  delegations such as South Africa, India, Vene zuela and Cuba, although Bolivia supported the 
intention underlying the proposal, it was not yet sufficiently ripe. Members could take into account the e-commerce work programme and its clearly defined mandates. Some work had been carried out under e-commerce on SMEs and the proponents should further refine their proposal bearing in 
mind e-commerce work that was under way. There should be a clear definition of objectives and 
functions to make headway on the proposal. 
5.19.  The representative of Pakistan was grateful to the Philippines for reaching out to Members 
and for making a presentation in the Asian developing country Members group. Pakistan regarded 
MSMEs as extremely important for its economy and it thus supported the tabled proposal. 
5.20.  The representative of Brazil thanked the Philippines and the co-sponsors for their proposal 
on MSMEs. MSMEs played an important role in  promoting development and had a number of 
domestic policies to support them and their contri bution to economic growth. However, Brazil was 
concerned to add a new proposal for consideration at the Ministerial in a moment where Members were far behind in their work: they had an ov ercharged agenda and should not overburden the 
Ministerial Conference. Brazil also had concerns about the proposal itself and its mandates. The 
discussion on the issue should be more mature before agreeing to a decision. Brazil would therefore like to have more debate on the proposal. 
5.21.  The representative of Nigeria thanked the Philippines and the co-sponsors for the revised 
proposals. MSMEs represented a source of econom ic growth and sustainable development. Their 
significant contribution to employment had the ability to create new lines of businesses of great interest to Nigeria. They had jobs and work creation capacity and their general socio-economic 
employment role could not be over-emphasized. Nigeria was open to further discussions under the 
revised proposal and was willing to join consensus on the matter. 
5.22.  The representative of the Republic of Mo ldova had taken a look at the proposal and would 
join those delegations that supported it. 
5.23.  The representative of Australia supported the Philippine proposal and encouraged Members 
to consider the issue on its merits without prejudice to other issues going on as they prepared for 
outcomes for Nairobi. He drew their attention to  what the decision actually was. The decision 
seemed to be as had been described by the Philippines – that the General Council would consider the most appropriate arrangements to facilitate th e exchange of information and experiences. That 
was a fairly innocuous but useful small step to take and one that would be a positive thing for the 
WTO to do given the relevance and importance of MSMEs to all of their economies. 
5.24.  The representative of Canada thanked the Philippines for facilitating the consultations that 
led to the proposal. Canada was astounded at th e posture being adopted by some in suggesting 
that somehow asking the General Council to think about something would add work. If Members 
were trying to avoid work in the Council, that was one thing. But they were in Geneva to try and have the Council deal with issues that mattered to everyone's economies and in creating jobs. All 
the proposed decision asked was whether the General Council could think about the issue and 
figure out how and whether to move the agenda forward. Did that add too much work? Did that burden Nairobi? The Ministers would only be asked to refer the work back to the Council. As such, 
those who said that they were overburdening th e Ministers were misreading the proposal. The 
draft decision was absolutely explicit in sayi ng it was without prejudice to the rights and 
obligations of Members; in giving priority to the benefits to least-developed and developing country Members; and in saying not to overburden the WTO but rather to consider how they could 
best do their work when it would come back to the General Council by coordinating better with 
UNCTAD, the ITC and other relevant international organizations. For those who said it was not right to have Ministers ask their ambassadors to do something, Canada wished to hear more detail 
about their concerns. It was straightforward for Ministers to give instructions to do something in 
Geneva. Canada therefore fully supported the proposal. 
5.25.  The representative of the Republic of Ko rea supported the proposal of the Philippines and 
other Members regarding MSMEs. From the previous interventions, it was obvious that it was an 
issue of great importance to many Members incl uding the Republic of Korea. Members should 
therefore not be hesitant to at least open discussions on such an issue in the organization. 
5.26.  The representative of the Philippines, on behalf of the co-sponsors Malaysia, Brunei 
Darussalam, Lao PDR and Singapore, thanked all delegations who had intervened and had WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 14 - 
 
 expressed their views on the current proposal. They saw that a growing number of Members had 
expressed interest in and support for a Ministerial Decision on that issue in Nairobi. On the other hand, they also discerned continuing and lingering concerns on their proposal so they would go back to the drawing board. They would try to cont inue to reach out to the Membership and for that 
purpose they would like to propose to keep that  item on the agenda of the General Council and 
hoped for its satisfactory resolution before Nairobi. 
5.27.  The Chairman said that the proposal continued to generate a lot of interest among 
delegations. At the same time, he noted that questions were being asked and that delegations 
needed more time to reflect. The General Council would therefore come back to the issue on its next regular meeting. 
5.28.  The General Council took note of the statements. 
6  TENTH SESSION OF THE MINISTERIAL CONFERENCE 6.1  Request for Observer Status by Palest ine to the Tenth Session of the Ministerial 
Conference (WT/L/960) 
6.1.  The Chairman drew attention to document  WT/L/960 which contained the request submitted 
by Palestine. He recalled that he announced at the General Council meeting in October that he 
would conduct consultations on the matter. He was pleased to report that the consultations that he 
had undertaken subsequently had been positive. Therefore, he proposed that the General Council 
would agree to grant Palestine Observer Status at MC10 on an ad hoc  basis.  
6.2.  The General Council so agreed. 
6.2  Attendance of Observers from Inte rnational Intergovernmental Organizations 
6.3.  The Chairman recalled that past practice up  to MC7 had been to invite those IGOs which had 
observer status in the previous Ministerial Conference  to attend the next one. He also recalled that 
for MC8 and MC9 consensus on repeating past practi ce with respect to IGOs attendance could not 
be reached. He had reported on his consultations at the General Council meetings in July and 
October and he had noted that there had still been divergence of opinions as  to how to address the 
matter. Since then, he had continued to consult with key delegations and he had noted that the 
positions expressed previously had not changed. Th erefore, he regretted that there was still no 
consensus regarding the attendance of Observer Organizations at MC10. 
6.4.  The representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, on behalf of the Arab Group, welcomed 
and congratulated the approval of Palestine's re quest for Observer Status at MC10. The Arab 
Group also thanked the Chairman for his continued efforts and consultation on the attendance of 
IGOs at MC10. The participation of all qualified IGOs at MC10 was crucial and every effort should be made to facilitate it. All IGOs should be treated on an equal footing and the process of 
considering their participation in MC10 should remain technical, transparent and objective. The 
screening process should be undertaken on the basi s of Annex 3 of the Rules of the Procedure of 
the Ministerial Conference and all requests should  receive equal treatment by the house. The Arab 
Group remained strongly committed to supporting the consensus to welcome each qualified IGO as 
an observer at MC10. 
6.5.  The representative of the Russian Federation  said that the Russian Federation was pleased to 
note the decision adopted by the General Council approving Palestine's request. Russia had always 
sustained the aspirations of Palestine as an inte gral part of the Middle East Peace Process. In 
2011, the Russian Federation had officially suppo rted Palestinian statehood. In 2012, Russia had 
voted in favour of the UN General Assembly Resolution 6719 granting Palestine non-member 
observer status in the United Nations. For the WTO, it was important to note that the resolution 
had implicitly recognized Palestinian state sovereignty. Being related to the issue of improving the guidelines for granting IGOs observer status in the WTO, Russia regretted the lack of progress in 
the consultations on attendance of observers from IGOs at MC10 particularly for not being backed 
by clear trade and economic reasons. Transparen cy was one the core principles adherence to 
which had always been a feature of the WTO. Granting observer status to IGOs in the WTO and at MC10 would increase transparency in the organiza tion's work. The Russian Federation therefore 
renewed its call to all parties concerned to show flexibility and to find a solution to the issue. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 15 - 
 
  6.6.  The representative of the Plurinational St ate of Bolivia joined those delegations that had 
supported Palestine's request for observer status at MC10. 
6.7.  The General Council took note of the statements. 
6.3  Statement by the Chairman 
6.8.  The Chairman recalled that the General Counc il at the July meeting had agreed on the three 
Vice-Chairs for MC10. In a fax that he had sent to delegations on 23 November, he had noted that 
due to exceptional circumstances the Minister of Fo reign Affairs of Chile – H.E. Mr Heraldo Muñoz, 
who had been appointed as one of the Vice-Chairs, would not be able to participate in the 
Conference. Following consultations, the Latin America and Caribbean grouping had proposed the Minister of Foreign Trade of Costa Rica – H.E. Mr Alexander Mora to be the new Vice-Chair. He had invited delegations to submit comments, if any, by 26 November. Since he had received no 
comments, he proposed that H.E. Mr Alexander Mora be appointed as a Vice-Chair for MC10. 
6.9.  The General Council so agreed. 
6.10.  The Chairman also noted that as a matter of course and in line with its Rules of Procedure, 
MC10 should take up two issues related to the orga nization of the Eleventh  Ministerial Conference 
– the date and venue of MC11 and the election of officers for that Conference. They appeared as 
items 3 and 4 on the MC10 Provisional Agenda in document WT/MIN(15)/W/1. He proposed that 
as in the past Ministers would refer those issues to the General Council for it to hold consultations 
on them when appropriate. 
6.11.  He also recalled that the Conference would undertake an Overview of WTO activities under 
item 1 of the Agenda on the basis of Annual Repo rts from the General Council and its subsidiary 
bodies. The annual reports which would be taken up under item 15 of the agenda constituted the 
main vehicle through which WTO bodies reported to Ministers on progress of work in their respective areas. In line with past practice, he would present those reports to Ministers in his 
statement at the Opening Session of the Ministerial Conference. 
6.12.  He also announced that the Conference would be opened on 15 December at 3 p.m. by the 
President of the Republic of Kenya. The first plenary session would be held on 16 December 
starting at 9.30 a.m. and would continue over the following days. As in the past, the Plenary 
Session would provide Ministers with the opportunity to make prepared statements in accordance with the List of Speakers. He reminded delegations that statements in the Plenary Session would be limited to three minutes. The two Accession Se ssions – of the Republic of Liberia and of the 
Islamic Republic of Afghanistan – would be held in the afternoon of 16 December and 
17 December respectively. The Closing Session was scheduled for 18 December. 
6.13.  The General Council took note of the statement. 
6.3.1  TRIPS Non-violation and situ ation complaints (IP/C/71/Add.2 and 
IP/C/71/Add.2/Corr.1) 
6.3.2  Work Programme on Elec tronic Commerce (WT/GC/W/712) 
6.14.  The Chairman drew attention to the draf t Decisions to be forwarded to the Ministerial 
Conference: on TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints and on the work programme on 
electronic commerce respectively. The texts of the draft decisions could be found in the report in IP/C/71/Add.2 and its Corrigendum 1 for TRIPS non violation and situation complaints and in 
document WT/GC/W/712 for electronic commerce. He proposed that, in accordance with practice, 
the General Council agreed to forward the draft texts for decision to the Ministerial Conference. As had been previously noted, those would also constitute specific outcomes to be reflected in Part II 
of the Ministerial Declaration. 
6.15.  The General Council so agreed
10. 
                                               
10 The draft decisions on TRIPS Non-violation and situation complaints and on the Work Programme on 
Electronic Commerce were forwarde d to the Ministerial Conference in documents WT/MIN(15)/W/25 and 
WT/MIN(15)/W/26, respectively. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 16 - 
 
 6.16.  The Chairman thanked Members for their constructive engagement in the process which had 
made it possible to agree on the two draft te xts. He also thanked Ambassador Abdolazeez Al-
Otaibi (Saudi Arabia), TRIPS Council Chairper son, and Ambassador Alfredo Suescom (Panama), 
Friend of the Chair for e-commerce, for driving the process to a successful outcome. 
6.17.  The General Council took note of the statement. 
7  REVIEW OF THE EXEMPTION PROVIDED UNDER PARAGRAPH 3 OF GATT 1994 
7.1.  The Chairman recalled that Paragraph 3(a) of  GATT 1994 provided an exemption from Part II 
of GATT 1994 for measures under specific mandatory legislation – enacted by a Member before it 
became a contracting party to GATT 1947 – which prohibited the use, sale or lease of foreign-built or foreign-reconstructed vessels in commercial applications between points in national waters or waters of an exclusive economic zone. In 1994, the United States had invoked the provision with 
respect to specific legislation that had met the re quirements of that paragraph. Paragraph 3(b) of 
GATT 1994 called for a review of the exemption five  years after the date of entry into force of the 
WTO Agreement – and thereafter every two years for as long as the exemption was in force – to 
examine whether the conditions for the exemption still prevailed. The General Council had last 
considered the matter at its meeting in February. Statements, questions and responses from interested delegations and the US together with th e annual report provided by the US circulated in 
WT/L/948 would form the basis for the current revi ew. The General Council had also agreed that it 
would consider the matter again at the current meeting including taking note that the subsequent review would be held in 2017. The exemption was without prejudice to solutions concerning 
specific aspects of the legislation covered by the exemption negotiated in sectoral agreements or 
in other fora. 
7.2.  The representative of Norway thanked the US  for organizing the consultations with regard to 
the continued application of the GATT Paragraph 3 exemption for the purposes of the Jones Act 
which prohibited the imports of vessels to the Unit ed States and the repair of the vessels abroad 
and restricting the cabotage regime. Norway had participated actively in the current consultations and in previous reviews of the exemption. Duri ng the years, a number of questions had been 
posed by Members to the United States both concerning previous notifications and the effects of 
the legislation. The answers had not been satisfac tory particularly as regards the continued need 
for the peculiar exemption under the WTO context. Th e review should focus on the salient points of 
Paragraph 3(b) – the examination of whether th e conditions which created the need for the 
exemption still prevailed. They should move beyond the discussions that they had been having and 
address the conditions for the exemption and its continued need. 
7.3.  The representative of Japan said that th e exemption was a deviation from the fundamental 
principles of the WTO. Its continuation without proper reasoning could undermine the credibility of 
the WTO as a whole. Therefore, Japan attached gr eat importance to the review process. However, 
the explanation by the US in the biannual review so far did not constitute a sufficient explanation 
of the substantial need for the exemption. Japa n's concerns had been deepened when the US 
congress had approved a new legislation which promoted the use of US-built vessels flying the US flag for the export of LNG. Japan hoped that more substantial and effective examination would be conducted to address its systemic concerns. 
7.4.  The representative of the European Union no ted EU's support to the review process. The EU 
thanked the US for its notification for the meeting held on 17 November and for its availability to 
answer questions. The EU underlined its strong  concerns with the unjustified exemption and 
continued to view the Jones Act as a piece of legislation that restricted fair competition in the ship-
building and shipping markets and no longer served  the legitimate purpose in the current global 
economy. The prevailing situation had negative economic consequences for the EU's and other 
Members' ship-building industry but also for the US maritime industry which was faced with higher 
costs due to the closure of US market for foreign-built ships. In that regard, the EU echoed again the statement made at the US Senate by Senator McCain qualifying the Jones Act as "an antiquated law that has for too long hindered free trade, made US industry less competitive and 
raised prices for American consumers". An amendmen t had been filed to repeal the legislation. The 
EU hoped that the 2015 review would deliver results and not be another simple recurring point on the agenda. The European Union encouraged the US to engage into a more objective approach in 
that area with a view to seriously review the exemptions in the near future. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 17 - 
 
  7.5.  The representative of China appreciated th e information provided by the United States. The 
exemption had been a long-standing subject for review. Like other Members, China had serious 
commercial and systemic concerns regarding the exemption and viewed the Jones Act as a piece 
of legislation that restricted fair competition in ship-building and shipping markets and no longer 
served a legitimate purpose in the present global  economy. The prevailing situation had not only 
had economic consequences for China's and other Member's ship-building industry but also for the US maritime industry which was faced with high cost due to the closure of US markets' foreign-
built ships. The review of the exemption should focus on examining whether the conditions for the 
exemption still prevailed rather than sharing data or information. The review should not become simply a recurring point in the General Council's agenda but rather the starting point to look into a situation that was neither justified nor satisfactory. The exemption was a deviation from the 
fundamental principles of the WTO which was not justified for national security purposes. China 
was disappointed to see that, no progress had been made towards eliminating the non-conforming provisions that had derogated from the WTO national treatment obligation since the review had 
been conducted in 1999. China thus looked forward to further clarification and justification by the 
US concerning the necessity and rationale of the exemption and was ready to join further discussions on the review. 
7.6.  The representative of the Republic of Ko rea thanked the United States for organizing the 
consultations. Like many Members, the Republic of Korea had systemic and commercial concerns 
regarding the United States exemption under Paragraph 3(a) of the GATT 1994. The Jones Act 
restricted fair competition in ship-building and shipping markets and no longer served legitimate 
purpose in the present global economy. The review  of the long-standing exemption in accordance 
with Paragraph 3(b) of the GATT 1994 should fo cus on examining whether the conditions which 
had created the need for such exemption still pr evailed. The Republic of Korea was willing to 
participate in any further discussion on the issue. 
7.7.  The representative of Hong Kong, China noted that it was the ninth review of the Jones Act 
exemption. As in the case of previous revi ews, Hong Kong, China was disappointed by the 
outcome. It saw the exemption as a major deroga tion from the principle of National Treatment 
which was so fundamental to the WTO. As an advocate of trade liberalization, Hong Kong, China did not want the exemption to be an impediment  to the Member concerned in making market 
access commitments in maritime transport services. That the exemption had perpetuated for 
almost 20 years was a cause of great concern. The latest review could have been an opportunity 
to consider whether the legislation covered by the exemption was still serving its original objectives and whether the conditions for maintaining the measures still prevailed. That 
opportunity had slipped again. Hong Kong, China hoped that discussions would continue and stood 
ready to be constructively engaged. 
7.8.  The representative of Australia was one of those who considered the exemption review as an 
important exercise given the significant trade impact of the US measures covered by the 
exemption. Australia had a particular interest in the issue given its commercial interest in maritime transport and related services and its expertise in building a range of maritime vessels including light-weight fast ferries. Australia's stakeholders regularly raised concerns about the requirement 
to effectively off-shore Australia's ship-building to the US to sell vessels that plied the US coastal 
trade. Australia had recognized the sensitivities of the US in relation to cabotage and coastal shipping. Those sensitivities were shared by many other Members including Australia. But it would 
nevertheless hope to see market opening on mari time transport and related services that would 
not contravene the Jones Act. Australia would welcome further information from the US on which aspects of the Jones Act necessitated restrictions on maritime transport and related services that 
were not related to cabotage or coastal shipping. It also shared the concerns by Japan and others 
about the trend towards more restrictive practices in the US particularly in relation to transport of LNG. Australia therefore encouraged the US to consider relaxing restrictions and to avoid 
introducing measures that would result in further market distortion. 
7.9.  The representative of Canada wished to put on records Canada's commercial and systemic 
concerns about the measure and the manner in which the review had been conducted over the 
past several meetings. Well-warm views had been stated but there had been no indication that it 
had triggered any genuine reflection or consideration by successive administrations including its 
congress on the merits of maintaining the measure at present times particularly in the North American context and of premising the continuation  of the measure in part on national security 
when they shared the world's largest fresh water lakes and an important waterway with ships from WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 18 - 
 
 both Canada and the United States. Sharing respon sibility would fly in the face of any alleged 
national security exception on where the construction would take place. 
7.10.  The representative of the United States welcomed the opportunity to participate in the 
review of the exemption under Paragraph 3 of GATT 1994. The United States had continued to 
provide WTO Members with annual statistical reports pursuant to the requirement of 
Paragraph 3(c) of the GATT 1994 including the most recent report that was before them that day. Those reports provided detailed annual reportin g of vessel orders and deliveries from US 
shipyards. As the United States had explained be fore and in various forms of consultations, the 
provisions of Paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994 were an  integral part of the GATT 1994. Paragraph 3 
of the GATT 1994 had been drafted and included in  the Uruguay Round package to deal with non-
conforming provisions of domestic legislation of a non-discretionary character in a specific area 
addressed by the exemption. Under Paragraph 3(a) , as long as the legislation that the United 
States had notified remained in force and had not been modified to reduce its conformity with Part 2 of the GATT 1994, the US legislation remain ed exempt and Part 2 of the GATT did not apply 
to it. That was the situation with respect to the US legislation that day. It remained in force and its 
conformity with Part 2 of the GATT 1994 had not decreased. The provision had been agreed to by 
all Members and was a central part of the Uruguay Round results. It was critical for US ship-
builders to build commercial ships for trade if a viable industrial base was to be maintained to 
meet future navy requirements. Moreover, the navy relied upon shipyards that performed commercial work for the Jones Act trades for day-to-day maintenance of naval and surge-fleet vessels. The only purpose of the review provided for in Paragraph 3(b) was to "examine whether 
the conditions which created the need for the exemption still prevail". The conditions that had 
created the need for the use of the exemption by th e United States still existed. Since the United 
States had invoked the exemption in 1994, there had been no amendments or measures adopted 
by the United States that would alter the US position in conforming to cover the exemption and 
the US had very much the same need as it had in 1994 to maintain its shipyards' readiness to build and maintain naval vessels. The US than ked Members who had intervened and while the 
year's review had concluded, it stood ready at any time to continue to answer Members' questions 
on the topic. 
7.11.  The General Council took note of the statem ents made in the course of the 2015 review and 
of the fact that the subsequent review under the two-yearly cycle provided in Paragraph 3(b) of 
GATT 1994 would be held in 2017. 
8  TRIPS COUNCIL MATTERS 8.1  Review under Paragraph 8 of the Decision  on the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of 
the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health (WT/L/540 and 
WT/L/540/Corr.1) – Report of the Council for TRIPS (IP/C/72) 
8.2  Proposal for a Decision on an Extens ion of the Period for the Acceptance by 
Members of the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement (IP/C/70) 
8.1.  The Chairman recalled that in August 2003, the General Council had adopted a Decision on 
the Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public 
Health. The Decision provided that the TRIPS Council should review annually the functioning of the 
system and should also report on its operation to the General Council. In addition, the General 
Council had adopted in December 2005 a Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement which had been submitted to Members for acceptance. In accordance with Article X:3 of the WTO Agreement, it 
would enter into force upon acceptance by two-thir ds of the Members. In view of the status of 
acceptances, the TRIPS Council had agreed to submit to the General Council a proposal for a decision on a fifth extension of the period for the acceptance by Members of the Protocol. 
8.2.  Since Ambassador Abdolazeez Al-Otaibi (Sau di Arabia), Chairperson of the TRIPS Council, 
was not present at the meeting, the Chairman read out the TRIPS Chairperson's statement on the matter at his request and on his behalf: 
8.3.  "At its meeting in October 2015, the TRIPS Council took up the annual review pursuant to 
Paragraph 8 of the Decision on the Implementation  of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the 
TRIPS Agreement and Public Health. The TRIPS Counc il's report on this review to the General 
Council has been circulated in document IP/C/72. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 19 - 
 
  8.4.  The cover note to this document sets out factual information regarding the implementation 
and use of the Decision, as well as the status of  acceptances of the Protocol Amending the TRIPS 
Agreement. The TRIPS Council's report also contai ns the record of the discussion that took place 
during the Council's review of the waiver decision.  
8.5.  In addition, the report contains a recommendation for a General Council decision on an 
extension of the period for the acceptance by Members of the Protocol, which I would like to 
address now under agenda item 8.B. 
8.6.  As you are aware, the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement that was done in Geneva on 
6 December 2005 is currently open for acceptance by Members until 31 December 2015.  Seven instruments of acceptance have been deposited this year, which is a clear indication for the continuing momentum up to the entry into force of the TRIPS Amendment. The pattern of 
acceptances represents a diverse range of Members across the full geographical and economic 
spectrum.  
8.7.  However, for the Protocol to enter into fo rce, acceptance by two thirds of the Members is 
required in accordance with paragraph 3 of Article X of the WTO Agreement which currently 
amounts to 108 Members. In other words, this still  leaves us with 21 more acceptances that are 
needed for the entry into force of the Protocol , and this despite its adoption ten years ago. 
8.8.  Given the present status of acceptances, the Council for TRIPS agreed to forward to the 
General Council a proposal for a decision to extend  once more the period for the acceptance of the 
Protocol until 31 December 2017. This proposal is  before the General Counc il in document IP/C/70, 
for consideration and adoption.  
8.9.  Let me use this opportunity to recall the political commitment undertaken by all Members in 
December 2005 when the General Council adopted the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement. This decision expressed the strong political cons ensus of the membership to convert the existing 
temporary waiver into a permanent provision of the TRIPS Agreement. This was and continues to 
be seen as a concrete contribution by the WTO to global efforts to strengthen the legal framework for access to medicines. 
8.10.  I would therefore like to call upon those Members who have not yet accepted the Protocol to 
expedite the necessary steps that enable them to  deposit their instruments of acceptance. Useful 
information on the expected benefits of the syst em was also provided by the Aide Mémoire that 
was adopted by this Council at its meeting on 20 February this year and circulated in document 
WT/GC/W/696." 
8.11.  The Chairman joined the TRIPS Council Chairperson in his call to take the necessary steps 
as a priority for the coming year so that the Protocol could enter into force expeditiously.  
8.12.  The General Council took note of the repo rt of the TRIPS Council in document IP/C/72 and 
adopted11 the draft decision in document IP/C/70 extending the time period for acceptance by 
Members of the Protocol amending the TRIPS Agreement to 31 December 2017. 
9  WTO ACCESSIONS: 2015 ANNUAL REPORT BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL (WT/ACC/25 
– WT/GC/174 – WT/MIN(15)/7) – STATEMENT BY DIRECTOR-GENERAL 
9.1.  The Chairman drew attention to the Director General's annual report on accessions which had 
been circulated in triple-symbol document WT/ACC/25 – WT/GC/174 – WT/MIN(15)/7. He invited 
the Deputy Director-General Shark to introduce the report. 
9.2.  Deputy Director-General Shark, on behalf of the Director-General, said accessions continued 
to be an area of significant success for the organization and considerable progress had been made 
in 2015. He thanked Members for their commitment  to that work and commended the leadership 
shown by the Chairpersons of the various Workin g Parties. In 2015, the WTO had welcomed two 
new Members – the Seychelles and Kazakhstan. Incidentally, the current session was Kazakhstan's 
first General Council meeting. He welcomed Ambassador Tileuberdi (Kazakhstan) and looked 
forward to working with him.  
                                               
11 The decision was subsequently circulated in document WT/L/965. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 20 - 
 
 9.3.  Members had also successfully conclude d the accession negotiations of Liberia and 
Afghanistan at the Working Party level. Ministers at MC10 would be formally asked to approve the decision granting WTO membership to Liberi a and Afghanistan. The conclusion of those 
negotiations was significant. Both countries were LDCs and he was confident that WTO 
membership would play an important role in their economic reforms and in their integration into 
the global economy. It showed that the WTO was delivering and that the organization was 
responding to the development priorities  and needs of the most vulnerable.   
9.4.  2015 also marked WTO's 20
th anniversary. The important contribution that Accessions had 
made to the organization over the past two deca des had been highlighted by a number of different 
events during the year – and it was a key element of the Director-General's Annual Report. The Report pointed out that WTO accessions had had a range of positive effects by expanding the 
multilateral trading system, extending the reach of  the rule of law in trade, supporting extensive 
domestic reforms, increasing market access and promoting international cooperation.  
9.5.  Completing an accession was not the end of  the process – rather, it would be the beginning. 
Effective implementation of accession-specific ob ligations and reforms was essential. The report 
therefore underscored the need for a "WTO Post-a ccession Implementation Support Strategy" for 
new Article 12 Members. The objective of the strategy was to assist new Members in implementing 
their accession-specific systemic obligations. It also aimed to provide them with a sound policy 
platform to leverage development assistance fr om the bilateral and multilateral development 
communities. It would help new Members to ease their transitions and maximize the benefits of WTO membership. He encouraged Members to help deliver on that important initiative.   
9.6.  Those were just some highlights of the report. As in previous years, the report provided 
detailed information across the accessions work. It provided insights on the WTO's successes and new ideas for improvements in the future. He invited Members to carefully reflect on all of those 
and welcomed their comments and advice as they prepared for the year ahead. He thanked all 
Members for their support and pragmatism which had allowed them to achieve considerable progress on the accessions front in 2015.   
9.7.  The representative of Kazakhstan thanked Members for welcoming Kazakhstan as a new WTO 
Member that day. On 27 July 2015, H.E. President Nursultan Nazarbayev, President of the Republic 
of Kazakhstan, had participated in the General Council meeting and had signed the Protocol of Accession to the Marrakesh Agreement Establishi ng the World Trade Organization. On 31 October 
after the completion of domestic procedures and ratification in the Parliament, Kazakhstan had 
submitted the Instrument of Accession to the Se cretariat. Kazakhstan had become the 162nd full-
fledged WTO Member and it was among the fellow Members participating in the meeting and 
considering the 2015 Annual Report by the Dire ctor-General on WTO Accessions. Kazakhstan 
congratulated the entire membership of the or ganization, the Director-General and his team, 
especially the Accessions Division led by Mr. Osakwe for the enormous amount of work done 
during the year 2015 and great achievements that were very well presented in the Report, 
including the completion of the accession of Kazakhstan. Kazakhstan also congratulated the delegations of Liberia and Afghanistan with the conclusion of their accessions negotiations and 
looked forward to the adoption of the accession pa ckages of Liberia and Afghanistan by the entire 
membership at MC10. Kazakhstan wished all the delegations and its new neighbour in the Council 
Room – the distinguished Delegation of Kenya, a successful MC10 in Nairobi. It hoped that joint efforts of all players in Geneva and in the capita ls would bring meaningful results and strengthen 
the multilateral trade system and the WTO. Kazakhstan would participate in the forthcoming 
Ministerial Conference for the first time as a full-fledged Member. It was planning to bring to Nairobi a high-level delegation led by the Chief Negotiator on its accession, Minister of Economic 
Integration Madame Zhanar Aitzhanova. Kazakhstan thanked all Members for their constructive 
support and joint efforts that made its membership possible and assured them that it stood ready to continue working at the WTO in the interest of all Members and for the benefit of their economies and nations. 
9.8.  The representative of Yemen said that Yemen, the most recently acceded LDC in the house, 
attached great association to the process of acce ssion. Accession to the WTO had been one of the 
organization's success stories in recent years – a result of hard labour by acceding countries and 
Members with the Secretariat's support. On 23 June 2014, Yemen had become the 160th Member 
of the WTO. The Seychelles and Kazakhstan had then become the 161st and 162nd and Yemen 
welcomed them to the family. Yemen looked forw ard to celebrating Afghanistan's and Liberia's 
protocol signing ceremonies in Nairobi bringing  the Membership to 164. The 2015 annual report on WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 21 - 
 
  WTO accessions reaffirmed the importance of th e process not only to acceding and recently 
acceded Members or Article XII Members but also to the full Membership. The quality value additions brought by Article XII Members was well -acknowledged in that respect. Commitments on 
both rules and market access were well-apprec iated by all. Article XII Members had shown 
admirable trade and economic performance in recent years and Yemen was hopeful to experience 
the same as soon as the unfortunate circumstances would clear out in its country. Yemen welcomed the Director-General's integrated initiative for post-accession strategy for Article XII 
Members particularly for the newly acceded LDCs. Support after accession was vital for 
commitment-implementation purposes, which had been ambitious in the case of recently-acceded LDCs, and for meaningful integration into the multilateral trading system and the global economy. Yemen hoped to benefit from the new facility as soon as it would overcome its current adverse 
circumstances.  
9.9.  The representative of the European Union welcomed the accessions of Kazakhstan, 
Afghanistan and Liberia. Including two LDCs in the organization would be an important moment at 
MC10. The EU took note of the report's assessmen t on possible opportunities for progress in the 
accession processes of Algeria, Belarus, Comoros,  Ethiopia and the Bahamas. The EU believed that 
the accessions of Serbia and of Bosnia and Herzegov ina deserved to be added in that list. Indeed, 
for both countries, the draft working party had been stabilized for some time and accession was 
just a matter of closing market access negotiations with a couple of WTO Members. The EU encouraged Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovin a and the interested Members to solve their 
outstanding issues in the negotiations in a pragmatic manner. 
9.10.  The representative of Mont enegro expressed its full support to the 2015 Annual Report on 
Accessions by the Director-General. Montenegro part icularly recognized the emphasis on the post-
accession support strategy and endorsed the rela ted conclusions and recommendations. That was 
an important aspect that provided newly acceded Members with continuous assistance to fully 
enjoy the benefits of Membership to the WTO and to implement the multilateral rules in a way that would continue to make a positive transformational impact on their economies. Montenegro also 
aligned itself with the statement of the EU. Mont enegro welcomed Kazakhstan and the Seychelles 
as new Members and congratulated Afghanistan and Liberia for the success of their final negotiations. It reiterated its support for the ongoing negotiations of its regional partners – Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Montenegro joined th e EU in encouraging the interested parties to 
intensify their negotiations with those two countries so that they could soon welcome Serbia and 
Bosnia and Herzegovina into the WTO family. 
9.11.  The General Council took note of the report and of the statements. 
10  DERESTRICTION OF HISTORICAL BILA TERAL NEGOTIATING DOCUMENTS OF THE 
TOKYO ROUND – DRAFT DECISION (G/MA/W/115/REV.1) 
10.1.  The Chairman drew attention to the Draft Decision on the Derestriction of some Historical 
Bilateral Negotiating Documentation concerning the Tokyo Round contained in document 
G/MA/W/115/Rev.1. The decision had been forwar ded to the General Council by the Committee on 
Market Access through the Council for Trade in Goods following its meeting in November. He proposed that the General Council adopted the draft decision he had just mentioned.  
10.2.  The General Council so agreed
12. 
                                               
12 The decision was subsequently circulated in document WT/L/966. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 22 - 
 
 11  WAIVERS UNDER ARTICLE IX OF THE WTO AGREEMENT 
11.1  Introduction of Harmonized System 20 02 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision (G/C/W/715) 
11.2  Introduction of Harmonized System 20 07 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision (G/C/W/716/REV.1) 
11.3  Introduction of Harmonized System 20 12 Changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff 
Concessions – Draft Decision (G/C/W/717) 
11.4  United States – African Growth Oppo rtunity Act – Draft Decision (G/C/W/713) 
11.5  Least Developed Country Members – Obligations under Article 70.8 and 
Article 70.9 of the TRIPS Agreement with re spect to pharmaceutical products – Draft 
Decision (IP/C/74) 
11.1.  The Chairman noted that the draft waiver decisions for the matters listed in sub-items 11.1 
to 11.4 had been taken up for consideration by the Council for Trade in Goods at its meeting on 
10 November. For those items, the Chairperson of th e Goods Council was required to report to the 
General Council. He invited Ambassador Héctor Casanueva (Chile) to report on the Council's 
consideration of those matters in a single intervention. 
11.2.  Ambassador Héctor Casanueva (Chile), Chairperson of the Council for Trade in Goods, 
reported that the Council for Trade in Goods at its meeting of 10 November had approved the 
collective request for waiver extension contained in document G/C/W/715 which had been made in connection with the introduction of HS2002 changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions. The Goods Council had also recommended that the draft waiver decision contained therein be 
forwarded to the General Council for adoption. Also at its meeting of 10 November, the Goods 
Council had approved the collective request for waiver extension contained in document G/C/W/716/Rev.1 which had been made in connection with the introduction of HS2007 changes 
into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions. The CTG had therefore agreed that the draft waiver 
decision contained therein be forwarded to the General Council for adoption. On the Introduction of Harmonized System 2012 changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions, he reported that the 
CTG at its 10 November meeting had approved the collective request for waiver extension 
contained in document G/C/W/717. The CTG had ther efore agreed that the draft waiver decision 
contained therein be forwarded to the General Council for adoption. 
11.3.  Concerning the waiver request by the United States for the Africa Growth and Opportunity 
Act (AGOA) for trade arrangements for countries of  the Sub-Saharan Africa, he reported that the 
Goods Council at its meeting on 10 November had considered document G/C/W/713 containing the United States' request to extend the currently existing waiver until 30 September 2025. At that 
meeting the Goods Council had approved the wa iver request and recommended that the draft 
decision annexed to G/C/W/713 be forwarded to the General Council for adoption. 
11.4.  The Chairman drew attention to th e draft decisions in documents G/C/W/715, 
G/C/W716/Rev.1 and G/C/W/717 which concerned the Introduction of Harmonized System 2002, 
2007 and 2012 changes into WTO Schedules of Tariff Concessions respectively. He proposed that in accordance with the Decision-Making Proced ures under Articles IX and XII of the WTO 
Agreement agreed in November 1995 (WT/L/93) the General Council adopt those three draft 
Decisions he had just referred to. 
11.5.  The General Council so agreed
13. 
11.6.  The Chairman turned to the Draft Decision  in document G/C/W/713. In accordance with the 
Decision-Making Procedures above-mentioned, he  proposed that the General Council adopt the 
draft Decision. 
11.7.  The General Council so agreed14. 
                                               
13 The decisions were subsequently circulated in documents WT/L/967, WT/L/968 and WT/L/969, 
respectively. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 23 - 
 
  11.8.  The representative of Bangladesh had carefu lly reviewed the draft decision on extending the 
AGOA waiver recently granted. Bangladesh understood the development challenges faced by the 
Sub-Saharan Members and hoped that the waiver would help them promote their trade with the 
US and consolidate their economic development.  The circumstances upon which the waiver was 
premised were also prevalent in many other LDCs . Bangladesh thus expected that the US would 
take a similar initiative to provide equivalent treatment to other LDCs whose coverage GNI was below 1,000 USD and share in trade was merely 1.3%, in line with the 1979 Decision on 
Differential and More Favourable Treatment, Reciprocity and Fuller Participation of Developing 
Countries and the 1994 Decision on Measures in fa vour of Least-Developed Countries referred to in 
the waiver decision. The AGOA waiver decision shou ld in no way impede the implementation of any 
WTO decision including the decision on DFQF market access to the LDCs. 
11.9.  The General Council took note of the statement. 
11.10.  The Chairman said that the fifth waiver on the agenda had been considered by the TRIPS 
Council. In the absence of Ambassador Abdolazeez  Al-Otaibi (Saudi Arabia), the TRIPS Council 
Chairperson, he read out his statement on his behalf, as follows: 
11.11.  "A request by the LDC Group to extend the transition period in the pharmaceutical sector 
and to waive obligations under Article 70.8 and 70.9 of the TRIPS Agreement was submitted by 
Bangladesh in February; it was circulated in IP/C/W/605. In response to this request, the Council 
for TRIPS, at its reconvened meeting on 6 November, agreed to recommend that the General Council decide to waive LDC Members' obligations under Article 70.8 and 70.9 with respect to pharmaceutical products. The draft Decision was circulated in document IP/C/74. It proposes that 
the General Council waive LDC Members' obligations regarding mailbox applications and exclusive 
marketing rights with respect to pharmaceutical products that would, pursuant to the TRIPS Agreement, otherwise be applicable during the ex tended transition period. The waiver of these 
obligations would apply until 1 January 2033, or, if that is earlier, the date when a country ceases 
to be a LDC Member." 
11.12.  The Chairman proposed that the General Council adopt the draft Decision contained in 
document IP/C/74 in accordance with the Decision-Making Procedures above-mentioned. 11.13.  The General Council so agreed
15. 
11.14.  The representative of Bangladesh, on be half of the LDCs, thanked the WTO Membership 
for agreeing to exempt the LDCs from the obli gation under Articles 70.8 and 70.9 of the TRIPS 
Agreement with respect to pharmaceutical products  and along with the extension of the transition 
period under TRIPS until 2033. It would enable LDCs to provide access to medicine to their poor people. The LDCs thanked Members for bringing new dimension to the transition to eject 
exempting obligations from Article 70.8 of the TRIPS Agreement taking into consideration the 
capacity constraint they faced in their countries. It was their understanding that with regard to the review foreseen in paragraph 2 of the draft waiver , the exceptional circumstances that justified the 
waiver would continue to exist for the LDC Memb ers until the waiver's expiry date of 2033. The 
LDCs registered its appreciation to the Members who had expressed unequivocal support to their request and hoped to get similar support from them in the coming days. 
11.15.  The representative of Uganda associat ed with the statement made by the LDCs and 
requested that Uganda's statement on the November TRIPS Council meeting be made part of the 
record of the current meeting.16 In adopting those waivers, Uganda recalled Paragraph 215 of the 
minutes of the TRIPS Council meeting of 18 July 2002 in IP/C/M/36 on the review process foreseen 
in Paragraph 2 of the Waiver Decision. In adopting the recommendation for adoption of the waiver 
under Article 70.9 of the TRIPS Agreements in 2002, the TRIPS Chair at that time had stated that it was understood in regard to the review fores een in Paragraph 2 of the draft waiver that the 
exceptional circumstances justifying the waiver would continue to exist for least-developed country 
Members until its expiry date of 2016. In view of the capacity constraints faced by the LDCs, 
Uganda recommended the same practice to be agreed on the waiver for them not to come back every year to justify the importance of those waiv ers. It should therefore be understood as it had 
                                                                                                                                               
14 The decision was subsequently circulated in document WT/L/970. 
15 The decision was subsequently circulated in document WT/L/971. 
16 Uganda's statement from the said TRIPS meetin g found in document IP/C/M/80/Add.1 paras. 343-
352 is incorporated by reference in the minutes of this meeting. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 24 - 
 
 been in 2002 that the exceptional circumstances ju stifying the waiver would continue to exist for 
LDC Members until the expiry date in 2033. Uganda thanked all WTO Members that played a critical role in adopting the extension of the tr ansitional period under Article 66.1 of the TRIPS 
Agreement for LDCs with respect to pharmaceutical products and for waivers from the obligation of 
Articles 70.8 and 70.9 until 2033. 
11.16.  The General Council took note of the statements. 
11.6  REVIEW OF WAIVERS PURSUANT TO ARTICLE IX:4 OF THE WTO AGREEMENT 
11.6.1  Preferential Treatment to Services  and Service Suppliers of Least-developed 
countries, granted on 17 December 2011 until 17 December 2026 (WT/L/847) 
11.6.2  Kimberley Process Ce rtification Scheme for Rough Diamonds, granted on 
12 December 2012 until 31 December 2018 (WT/L/876) 
11.6.3  European Union - Application of Auto nomous Preferential Treatment to the West 
Balkans, granted on 30 November 2011 until 31 December 2016 (WT/L/836, WT/L/962) 
11.6.4  Cuba – Article XV:6 of GATT 199 4, Extension of Waiver, granted on 
14 February 2012 until 31 December 2016 (WT/L/850, WT/L/964) 
11.17.  The Chairman recalled that in 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 four waivers before the General Council for review as listed under sub-item (f) of the agenda. Two of those under re view provided that an annual report should be 
submitted by the Members concerned regarding the operation or implementation of those waivers 
with a view to facilitating their annual review by the General Council. The reports from those Members had been circulated in documents WT/L /962 (European Union) and WT/L/964 (Cuba). 
11.18.  The General Council took note
17 of the reports contained in documents WT/L/962 and 964 
and of the Chairman's statement. 
12  COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND AD MINISTRATION - REPORT ON MEETINGS 
OF OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER 2015 (WT/BFA/151) 
12.1.  The Chairman drew attention to the reports of the Budget Committee in document 
WT/BFA/151 and invited Ambassador Blockart (Sweden), CBFA Chairperson, to introduce it. 12.2.  Ambassador Daniel Blockart (Sweden), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administration, said that in its meetings in October and November, the Committee on Budget 
Finance and Administration had dealt with a number of items and was making five 
recommendations to the General Council. First, the Committee had reviewed the budget proposal 
for the ITC for the biennium 2016-17. The ITC budget had been increased by 1.65% compared to 
the 2015 budget due to the re-costing mechanism applied by the UN. The Secretariat had absorbed the increase within the WTO Budget as requested by the Committee. ITC had also 
submitted a proposal to discontinue the submission of the simplified fascicle as foreseen in the 
current administrative arrangements to take effect with the preparation of the submission of the budget proposal for the biennium 2018-2019. The Committee recommended that the General Council approve the ITC budget as proposed in paragraphs 3.3 and 3.4 of the report WT/BFA/151.  
12.3.  Second, the Committee had examined the WTO budget proposals for the next biennium. To 
meet Members' expectations the Director-General had presented a zero nominal growth budget for 2016 and 2017, the 6th and the 7th zero nominal growth budgets in a row. The Committee had 
welcomed efforts of the Secretariat to address th e pressures on the dispute settlement system by 
reallocating resources. It had also acknowledged the special budgetary pressures due to the fact 
that ownership of two buildings had been transf erred to the WTO which then had to pay for the 
maintenance. The Committee recommended that the General Council approve the WTO budget of 
                                               
17 A statement from Montenegro on this item is incorporated in the minutes of this meeting and can be 
found in Annex 2 of this document. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 25 - 
 
  CHF 197.2 million annually as proposed in paragr aphs 1.6 to 1.12 (b) of the report. The report 
also included the scale of contribution assessed to WTO Members for 2016 as well as the contribution of Kazakhstan who had become the 162
nd Member of the WTO. 
12.4.  Third, the Committee had examined the Bienni al Technical Assistance and Training Plan for 
2016-17. The plan had improved its activities whil e maintaining the same le vel of expenditure as 
in the last biennium in order to respond to the needs and priorities identified by Members. The 
Committee recommended that the General Council provide secure and predicable financing for the 
implementation of the Plan as proposed in paragraph 2.4 of the report.  
12.5.  The Committee had reviewed and had approv ed the proposed revisions to the Regulations 
of the Pension Plan contained in the WTO Pension Plan Management Board report. The Committee recommended that the General Council approve th e revised recommendations and that they enter 
into force on 1 January 2016. 
12.6.  The Committee had been updated on the administrative progress reports related to the 
budgetary and financial situation and the extra-budgetary funds as of the 3
rd quarter of 2015. 
Some recent contributions had been received from The Netherlands, European Commission, United 
Kingdom, Sweden, Germany, Norway and France. 
12.7.  Regarding the fact that the WTO was then the owner of the Centre William Rappard and the 
Administrative Building, the Committee had decided to establish a Building Renovation Fund in 
order to cover the costs of medium and long-ter m building and infrastructure needs of the WTO 
site. On that matter, the Committee recommended to the General Council for the credit balance of the year 2011 Surplus account to be transferred to the Building Renovation Fund as stipulated in 
the recommendation in paragraph 7.3 (b) of the report WT/BFA/151. 
12.8.  Finally, the Committee had established two Working Groups: one on ASHI to monitor the 
Secretariat's work on developing an ASHI Strategy and chaired by Mr. John Newham (Ireland) and 
a Working Group chaired by Mr. John O'Neil (Can ada) which would determine whether there was a 
need at the WTO for an Audit Committee. 
12.9.  The General Council took note of the CBFA  Chairperson's statement, approved the Budget 
Committee's specific recommendations contained in paragraphs 1.6 to 1.12(b), 2.4, 3.3, 3.4, 4.5, 
4.6, 7.3(b) of its report and adopted the Committee's report in WT/BFA/151 as a whole. 
13  WTO PENSION PLAN 
13.1  Management Board – Election of a Me mber – Proposal by the Chairman of the 
General Council (WT/GC/W/707) 
13.1.  The Chairman recalled that Article 4(a) of the Regulations of the WTO Pension Plan provided 
for the election by the General Council of a Chairperson, four members and four alternates to the 
Management Board of the Pension Plan. In a communication circulated in WT/GC/W/707, he had 
indicated that a member, Mr. Schagrin (United States) had no longer been available to serve on the Board and he had proposed Mr. Wilson (United States) who had kindly agreed to have his 
name put forward for election as member. He had also invited delegations to submit any 
comments they could have by close-of-business on 24 November. Since he had not received any comments regarding the proposed nomination, he proposed that the General Council elect Mr. Christopher Wilson (United States) to serve as member on the Management Board of the Pension 
Plan for the remainder of the Board's term. 
13.2.  The General Council so agreed
18. 
13.3.  The representative of Turkey congratulated Mr. Christopher Wilson on his new responsibility. 
Turkey took note of Article 5 of the Chairman's proposal inviting delegations interested in serving 
on the WTO Pension Plan Management Board when future vacancies would arise. It was a new addition that Turkey had not noticed in previous  proposals. It was an improvement compared to 
the past and he thanked the Chairman for the additional transparency. Transparency and 
inclusiveness were significant principles that Turkey would like to see observed at all times and at every level. Serving in the organization at variou s bodies was a responsibility for all Members and 
                                               
18 The decision was subsequently circulated in document WT/L/972. WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 26 - 
 
 a privilege thereof. Turkey therefore would like to see that a more inclusive and transparent way 
would be observed in future elections to the WTO Pension Plan Management Board. 
13.4.  The General Council took note of the statement. 
13.2  Amendment to the Regulations (WT/GC/W/706) 
13.5.  The Chairman said that the amendment to a number of provisions of the Regulations of the 
Pension Plan had been circulated in document  WT/GC/W/706 and had been recommended by the 
Management Board and the Budget Committee which had reviewed the regulations. Those 
amendments were set out in Annex 1 of the docu ment and were submitted to the General Council 
for approval pursuant to Article 43(a) of the Plan Regulations. He invited Mr. Johannes Rühl (Switzerland), Chairperson of the Management Board, to introduce the report. 
13.6.  Mr. Johannes Rühl (Switzerland), Chairperson of the Management Board, said that the WTO 
Pension Plan Management Board proposed to the General Council two sets of amendments to the 
WTO Pension Plan Regulations. First, in the context of the regular actuarial valuation conducted on 31 December 2013 and pursuant to Article 9 of the Plan Regulations, the Management Board had 
identified a small but persistent actuarial imbalance in the Pension Plan. The Board had identified 
four actuarial measures to redress the imbalance and recommended a series of corresponding amendments to the Pension Plan Regulations. Second, the Management Board recommended four 
additional changes to the regulations that would improve the technical clarity. Those changes did 
not have actuarial or financial impacts on the plan and did not modify the benefits of participants or the financial obligations of Members towards the Plan. The Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration had endorsed those recommendations at its meeting on 6 November and the 
amendments were set out in document WT/GC/W/706 and were submitted to the General Council 
for approval pursuant to Article 43(a) of the Plan Regulations. 
13.7.  The General Council took note of the st atement and approved the amendment to the WTO 
Pension Plan Regulations as set out in document WT/GC/W/706. 
14  INTERNATIONAL TRADE CENTRE UNCTAD/W TO - REPORT OF TH E JOINT ADVISORY 
GROUP ON ITS 49TH SESSION (ITC/AG(XLIX)/260) 
14.1.  The Chairman noted that in connection with  the item, the Chairperson 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 invited Ambassador Aguirre 
(Paraguay), Chairperson of the CT D, to report on the matter. 
14.2.  Ambassador Juan Esteban Aguirre (Paraguay), Chairperson of the Committee on Trade and 
Development, reported that the Joint Adviso ry Group on the International Trade Centre 
UNCTAD/WTO had held its 49th Session on 26 June. The report on that meeting was contained in 
document ITC/AG/(49)/260. The report had been presented to the CTD at its 97th Session on 13 
November by the Chairperson of the JAG, Ambassador Patricia O'Brien (Ireland). The JAG Chairperson had said that at its 49th Session the JAG had expressed appreciation for the ITC's 
renewed focus on innovation, effectiveness and pragmatic results on the ground. Delegations at 
the JAG had confirmed their support for the ITC’s new strategic direction as laid out in its Strategic Plan for 2015-2017.  
14.3.  The ITC’s achievements in building strategic partnerships, including with the private sector, 
had been recognized. Furthermore, delegates had welcomed the organization's focus on doing 
more and doing it better, for example through th e expanding portfolio of national and regional 
programmes addressing areas such as SME competitiveness, trade facilitation, regional economic 
integration, non-tariff measures and South-So uth cooperation. The ITC’s work on women’s 
economic empowerment, promoting young entrepreneurs and linking SMEs to markets through the use of e-commerce had also been seen by the JAG as important areas in which the ITC should 
maintain a presence. In terms of areas for further improvement, delegates at the JAG had 
mentioned the need to better align the relationship between projects and the activities carried out based on objective impact assessments. Delegates had also highlighted the need to better elaborate the link between funds received and results achieved.  
14.4.  The second part of the JAG meeting had focused on the implementation of the 
recommendations provided by the two recent external evaluations of ITC, namely, the 2014 WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 27 - 
 
  Independent Evaluation and the 2015 UN Office  of Internal Oversight Services Programme 
Evaluation. It had been reaffirmed that the ITC had accepted all of the strategic recommendations. Delegations at the JAG had also been informed of a number of initiatives taken by the ITC to respond to the recommendations. The CTD had taken note of the JAG report and forwarded it to 
the General Council for adoption. 
14.5.  The General Council adopted the report of the Joint Advisory Group in document 
ITC/AG(49)/260 and took note of the CTD Chairperson's statement. 
15  REVIEW OF WTO ACTIVITIES 15.1  General Council (WT/GC/W/705), Dispute Settlement Body (WT/DSB/67), and 
Trade Policy Review Body (WT/TPR/361) 
15.2  Sectoral Councils (G/L/1140, S/C/ 48, and IP/C/71 and IP/C/71/Add.1, 
IP/C/71/Add.2 and IP /C/71/Add.2/Corr.1) 
15.3  Committees on Trade and Developmen t (WT/COMTD/87), Trade and Environment 
(WT/CTE/22), Balance-of-Payments Restri ctions (WT/BOP/R/111), Budget, Finance 
and Administration (WT/BFA/152), and Re gional Trade Agreements (WT/REG/25) 
15.4  Working Groups on Trade, Debt and Finance (WT/WGTDF/14) and Trade and 
Transfer of Technology (WT/WGTTT/17) 
15.5  Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements (GPA/134, WT/L/963) 
15.1.  The Chairman took up the reports under th e agenda item which had been drawn up in line 
with the Decision concerning procedures for an annual overview of WTO activities and for reporting 
under the WTO in document WT/L/105. Delegations had already had a substantive discussion on 
those reports in the respective bodies where they had been adopted and he would therefore 
suggest that they would not repeat those discussions in the General Council.  All reports from the respective bodies would be forwarded to the Ministerial Conference for Ministers' consideration. 
15.2.  The General Council took note of the Chairman's statement. 
15.3.  The Chairman invited the General Council to adopt the report of the Committee on Trade 
and Development in document WT/COMTD/87 and to take note of the reports of the other WTO 
bodies including the reports of the Committees under the Plurilateral Trade Agreements listed in 
the Proposed Agenda.  
15.4.  The General Council so agreed. 
15.5.  The Chairman proposed that the General Council adopt the draft Report of the General 
Council contained in document WT/GC/W/705 on the understanding that the Secretariat would 
make the necessary adjustments to that Report to include matters that had been considered at the 
meeting. The Council's Report would then be ci rculated and also forwarded to the Ministerial 
Conference. 
15.6.  The General Council so agreed.   
16  APPOINTMENT OF OFFICERS TO WTO BO DIES – ANNOUNCEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN 
PURSUANT TO PARAGRAPH 7.1(A) OF THE GUIDELINES (WT/L/510) 
16.1.  The Chairman drew attention to the Guid elines for the Appointment of Officers to WTO 
bodies in document WT/L/510. Those Guidelines pr ovided that the outgoing Chair of the General 
Council would conduct consultations on the appointment of chairpersons to the WTO bodies in 
Groups 1, 2, 4 and 5 of the Annex to the Guidelin es. The Guidelines also provided that to promote 
transparency, the selection process should start with an announcement by the Chair at the General Council meeting held in December each year. Th e consultations for the appointment of officers 
would start in mid-January. In accordance with the Guidelines, he should be assisted in the 
selection process by the serving Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, Ambassador Neple (Norway), and by Ambassador Fried (Canada), former  Chairman of the General Council. A list of WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 28 - 
 
 past Chairs of major bodies was available to provide some structure on discussions on the possible 
distribution of chairs based on past practice and the need for balance. In keeping with the 
Guidelines, representatives of Members in financ ial arrears for over one full year could not be 
considered for appointment. The practical steps to improve the implementation of the Guidelines in 
document JOB/GC/22 provided that groups, namely the developed countries, Latin America and 
the Caribbean, Asia and Africa, had a role in putting forward names of candidates for the slots available to them. Therefore, they would be meeting with group coordinators first.   
16.2.  The General Council took note of the Chairman's statement. 
17  ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES FOR MEMBERS IN ARREARS – STATEMENT BY THE 
CHAIRMAN 
17.1.  The Chairman recalled that at its meeting in October 2012, the General Council had 
approved a recommendation from the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration regarding 
revised Administrative Measures for Members in arrears, as contained in WT/BFA/132, Annex I.  The new revised measures had entered into force on 1 January 2013. Among those Administrative 
Measures was a requirement that, at the end of each meeting of the General Council, the 
Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration should provide information 
with regard to which Members and Observers were  under Administrative Measures. He invited the 
CBFA Chairperson, Ambassador Blockart (Sweden), to provide the Council with that information. 
17.2.  Ambassador Daniel Blockart (Sweden), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administration, reported that as required by the General Council decision, he should list the 
Members and Observers under Categories I-III of the Administrative Measures as at 30 November 
2015. There were 8 Members in Category I: Grenada, Malawi, Rwanda, Saint Vincent and the 
Grenadines, Suriname, the Former Yugoslav Repub lic of Macedonia, Vanuatu, and the Bolivarian 
Republic of Venezuela. There were 5 Members in Category III: Central African Republic, Djibouti, 
Dominica, Guinea-Bissau and Mauritania. There we re 3 Observers in Category I: Equatorial 
Guinea, Libya and Sudan. There was 1 Observer in Category III: Sao Tome and Principe. 
17.3.  The Chairman said that under the new revised Administrative Measures, he was also 
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 may be expected.   
17.4.  The General Council took note of the statements. 
_______________ WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 29 - 
 
  ANNEX 1 
 
STATEMENT BY THE HOLY SEE (OBSERVER) ON THE REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 
TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE (AGENDA ITEM 1) 
At the request of the Holy See (Observer), the above-mentioned statement is included below as 
part of the Minutes of the General Council meeting.  
_______________ 
  My Delegation wishes to extend its sincere gratit ude to you, Mr. Chair, for convening this meeting 
and providing me with an opportunity to share our views on current WTO issues. I also join other 
delegations in thanking the Director General of the WTO for his comprehensive report this morning 
on various areas of our common concern.  
 
The Holy See is confident that, in Nairobi, a sense of responsibility and solidarity with the most disadvantaged will prevail, so that narrow interest s and the logic of power will be set aside. In this 
regard, in his recent address to the U.N.O.N., Pope  Francis affirmed that “while recognizing that 
much has been done in this area, it seems that we have yet to attain an international system of commerce which is equitable and completely at the service of the battle against poverty and exclusion. Commercial relationships between States, as an indispensable part of relations between 
p e o p l e s ,  c a n  d o  a s  m u c h  t o  h a r m  t h e  e n v i r o n m e n t  a s  t o  r e n e w  i t  a n d  p r e s e r v e  i t  f o r  f u t u r e  
generations.”  
It must not be forgotten that the vulnerability of rural areas, if they are denied access to the 
market, has significant repercussions on the subsistence of small farmers and their families. The Holy See recognizes the benefit of an equitable and participatory multilateral system of trade 
relations directed to attaining and developing the common good. A spirit of solidarity among all 
countries and peoples should replace the ceaseless competition that aims to achieve and defend privileged positions in international trade. Pr otectionism too often favours already privileged 
segments of society. Effective multilateralism, on the other hand, is an inclusive process which 
acknowledges that at the core of all social and econ omic relations, and hence of trade relations, is 
the human person, with inherent dignity and inal ienable human rights. Therefore, a rules-based 
trade system or, better yet, a fair system of trade rules is indispensable. It is no coincidence that 
as the rule of law in trade has spread, average tariffs have fallen dramatically. In fact, they have 
been cut in half. Average applied tariffs were 15% in 1995. Today they stand at less than 8% and trade volumes have more than doubled. 
 
This Organization provides a forum for policy dialogue and information sharing, where members can monitor each other’s practices and regulations to ensure that agreements are being observed. 
This process of monitoring trade policies, und erpinned by a clear system of common rules and 
obligations, was pivotal in ensuring that the financial crisis of 2008 was not followed by an 
outbreak of protectionism as we saw in the 1930s.  Multilateralism has a development value. In this twentieth year of the WTO, we should seek to strengthen multilateral trade. The GATT/WTO 
has played an important role in strengthening multilateralism. It has promoted an inclusive and 
open rules-based and non-discriminatory trading sy stem and it has contributed to rapid economic 
growth. The legal and policy framework of the WTO remains a bulwark against protectionism. For 
those who cynically question the effectiveness of the WTO, we should ask them why is it that over 
30 new Members, now accounting for approximately 20% of the WTO membership, acceded since 1995? The WTO has contributed to the enhanced we lfare in these Members and to growth in the 
global economy. 
 
In his last Encyclical Letter, Pope Francis reminded us that: “inequity affects not only individuals but entire countries; it compels us to consider an ethics of international relations. A true ‘ecological 
debt’ exists, particularly between the global north and south, connected to commercial imbalances 
with effects on the environment, and the disproportionate use of natural resources by certain countries over long periods of time.”  Therefore,  a fair system of trade rules should be shaped 
according to the level of economic development of the Member States and give explicit support 
and special and differential treatment to the poores t countries. When the levels of development of 
the members are excessively unequal, the consent of the parties may not be sufficient to WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 30 - 
 
 guarantee the justice of their agreement: “trade relations can no longer he based solely on the 
principle of free, unchecked competition, for it very often creates an economic dictatorship. Free trade can be called just only when it conforms to the demands of social justice.”  Moreover, the question of justice in today’s trade rules is pr oblematic because such rules tend to grant more 
privileges to those who possess more economic power. A fair system of trade rules is an 
international public good that can play a major role in the promotion of sustainable development and the alleviation of poverty such has been reco gnized in the United Nations’ 2030 Agenda for 
Sustainable Development. 
 Without a fair system of trade rules, vulnerable people in many developing and developed countries will be “locked in a poverty trap”.  This approach is in line with the concern to put the 
human person at the centre of any development and trade strategy, recognizing that only by 
promoting individual’s capabilities, by enabling ev ery person and every social group to make the 
most of the opportunities created by trade liberaliz ation, will it be possible to implement a truly 
mutually beneficial fair trade. Opening access to new markets offers a real opportunity for 
developing countries and is an important element of the development process; however, it is not 
per se a sufficient condition for lifting countries out of poverty. The international trading system 
should guarantee a true partnership based on equa l and reciprocal relations among rich and poor 
countries. Free trade is not an end in itself but rather a means for better living standards and the human development of people at all levels. The Doha Development Agenda in this sense represents a significant multilateral attempt to trade and development interests of those 
developing Members so as to heal the imbalance codified in the rules.  
 In conclusion, the Delegation of the Holy See reiterates its hope that the consensus reached on the 
proposal of extension and non-violation complaints at the TRIPs Council, over the past weeks, 
represents an important sign by the World Tr ade Organization in preparation for the next 
Ministerial Conference.  The Holy See Delegati on remains confident that a sense of common 
responsibility, as shown in the decisions adopted, will bring us to reach an historic result in 
Nairobi. In this regard, before the Assembly of the UNON, last Thursday, the Holy Father expressed his desire  that: “the deliberations of the forthcoming Nairobi Conference will not be a simple balancing of conflicting interests, but a genuine service to care of our common home and 
the integral development of persons, especially those in greatest need”.  In the context of a 
“family of nations” those countries economically more developed can provide assistance that will allow for attainment of the development which corr esponds to our shared human dignity. Precisely 
because people have been endowed with the same extraordinary dignity no one should be reduced 
to living without the benefits of trade.  
_______________ WT/GC/M/160 
 
- 31 - 
 
  ANNEX 2 
 
STATEMENT BY MONTENEGRO ON THE REVIEW OF WAIVERS PURSUANT TO 
ARTICLE IX:4 OF THE WTO AGREEMENT (AGENDA ITEM 11.F) 
At the request of Montenegro, the above-mentioned statement is included below as part of the 
Minutes of the General Council meeting. 
_______________ 
 
 Montenegro would like to thank European Union for taking this action as it is very important for our overall trade relations. We would also like to thank the entire membership for supporting and 
agreeing to extend application of autonomous pref erential treatment by EU to the Western Balkan 
countries until 31 of December 2016.  
__________