RESTRICTED  
  
IP/C/M/106  
 
17 January  2023 
(23-0420) Page: 1/12 
Council for Trade -Related Aspects of  
Intellectual Property Rights    
 
 
MINUTES OF MEETING  
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 12 -13 OCTOBER AND 15-16 DECEMBER 2022 
Chair: H.E. Ambassador Dr Lansana GBERIE  
The present document contains the record of the meeting of the Council for TRIPS held on 
12-13 October  and 15-16 December  2022. The statements made during the meeting will be 
circulated in an addendum to the present document.  
_______________  
Table of Contents  
1   NOTIFICATIONS UNDER PROVISIO NS OF THE AGREEMENT  ................................ ........  2 
2   REVIEWS OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION  ................................ ..............  3 
3   IP AND COVID -19 ................................ ................................ ................................ ........  3 
4   REVIEW  OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B)  ................................ .....................  4 
5   RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND THE CONVENTION ON 
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY  ................................ ................................ ................................ .. 4 
6   PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE  ................................ ..... 4 
7   ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL COMPULSORY LICENSING SYSTEM  
(PARAGRAPH 7 OF THE ANNEX TO THE AMENDED TRIPS AGREEMENT AND  
PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE DECISION ON THE  IMPLEMENTATION OF PARAGRAPH 6 OF THE 
DOHA DECLARATION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH)  .........................  5 
8   NON-VIOLATION AND SITUATIO N COMPLAINTS  ................................ .........................  5 
9   REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT UNDER  
ARTICLE 71.1  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...................  6 
10   REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION ON 
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2  ................................ ......................  6 
11   TWENTIETH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE DECISION ON THE 
IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT  ................................ ..... 7 
12   TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY -BUILDING  ................................ ..............  8 
13   PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE MINISTERIAL DECISION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT 
ADOPTED ON 17 JUNE 2022  ................................ ................................ .............................  8 
14   INTELLECTUAL PR OPERTY AND INNOVATION: ROLE OF IP TO RAISE FINANCE  
FOR START -UPS ................................ ................................ ................................ .............  11 
15   INFORMATION ON RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE IN THE WTO  ...............  11 
16   OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL  
ORGANIZATIONS  ................................ ................................ ................................ ...........  11 
17   ANNUAL REPORT  ................................ ................................ ................................ ..... 12 
18   OTHER BUSINESS  ................................ ................................ ................................ .... 12 IP/C/M/106  
 
- 2 - 
 
  1  NOTIFICATIONS UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT  
1.  The Chair invited the Secretariat to update delegations on the notifications under various 
provisions  of the TRIPS Agreement that had been submitted since the meeting in July 2022 , and 
said he would then offer the floor to delegations wishing to introduce their not ifications.  
2.  The representative of the Secretariat  said that the Council had received the following 
notifications, under Article 63.2 of the TRIPS Agreement:  
a. Thailand  had provided a Notification of the Ministry of Commerce on the Determination of 
Counterfei t Goods and Pirated Goods as Goods Prohibited from Export ; 
b. Saudi Arabia, Kingdom of  had notified its Competition Law and the corresponding 
implementing Regulations ;  
c. Tonga  had notified consolidated 2020 versions of its Industrial Property Act and 
Regulatio ns, its Copyright Act, its Protection of Layout Designs Act and Regulations, its 
Protection of Geographical Indications Act and Regulations, and its Customs and Excise 
Management Act;  
d. The Seychelles  had notified its 2022 Fair Trading Act ; 
e. The European Unio n had notified three EU Regulations pertaining to the quality schemes 
for agricultural products and foodstuffs, to the establishment of Union Symbols for PDOs, 
PGIs and TSGs, and to the GIs for aromatized wines ; 
f. Brazil  had notified an amendment to its Patent Statute ;  
g. Ukraine  had notified a law concerning the Protection of Interests of Persons in the Sphere 
of Intellectual Property during the Martial Law in connection with the Military Aggression 
of the Russian Federation a gainst Ukraine;  
h. Chinese Taipei  had notified consolidated versions of its Patent Act, its Copyright Act, and 
its Copyright Collective Management Organization Act ; 
i. Italy had notified Decrees relating to the Prohibition of Ambush Marketing ahead of the 
organization of the 2026 Olympic Games in Italy, to Design protection, and to establishing 
specialized intellectual property divisions of tribunals and courts of appeals. It ha d also 
notified amended procedural rules relating to plant varieties, to patent applications that 
designate Italy, and to the setting up of an online platform for fee payment ; 
j. France  had notified legislation relating to genetic resources and associated trad itional 
knowledge, to ensuring compatibility with the Unified Patent Court jurisdiction, to 
trademarks, trade secrets and to the transformation of utility model applications into 
patent applications, among others.  
3.  Bulgaria , Austria , Lithuania  and Greece  had notified a contact point for IP enforcement under 
Article 69. Austria  had also notified a contact point under Art 67.  
4.  The Chair invited delegations that had provided new or revised notifications to the Council to 
introduce those notifications. The repre sentatives  of Thailand , Seychelles , the European Union , 
Chinese Taipei , Brazil , Ukraine , Saudi Arabia, the Kingdom of , Tonga , the Russian Federation , and 
the United  States  of America  took the floor.  
5.  The Chair thanked delegations for the information provided on their notifications. He noted that 
notifications to the Council were not keeping up with the actual development of laws and regulations 
relating to TRIPS and emphasized that Article 63.2 of the TRIPS Agr eement was not a one -off 
requirement. It was a core element of the TRIPS transparency arrangements, and a central part of 
the Council 's substantive work. It obliged Members to notify any new or amended laws in the area 
of TRIPS . He urged Members to complet e any outstanding initial notifications and to keep up to date 
with notifications on subsequent amendments. The same applied to the Checklist of Issues on IP/C/M/106  
 
- 3 - 
 
  Enforcement which was established by the Council as an element of Members ' notification 
obligations. He pointed out that the e -TRIPS platform made fulfilling these transparency obligation s 
much easier.  
6.  The requirement included the notification of legislative changes made to implement the special 
compulsory licensing system to export medicines covered by A rticle 31 bis of the TRIPS Agreement. 
More than 50 WTO Members, including most of the world 's major exporters of medicines, ha d 
adopted implementing legislation that allow ed them to use the System as exporters and/or 
importers. But only 2 1 Members, including the European Union, ha d formally notified such measures 
to the TRIPS Council.  The notification of all relevant laws and regulations could assist Members in 
preparing for the potential use of the System, which was a matter of immediate practical concern at 
that moment. It would also help the Secretariat in its efforts to provide informed technical support 
to Members in this area.  
7.  A more comprehensive picture of how the spec ial compulsory licensing system ha d been 
implemented in Members ' domestic law could also help Members ' on-going discussions about how 
this particular TRIPS flexibility work ed in practice, and about the causes of any potential delays or 
hindrances in using the system . 
8.  The Chair recalled that all these notifications could be made through the e -TRIPS Notification 
Submission System  (NSS) . E-TRIPS not only facilitate d the submission of information by Members 
– it also permitted digital access, consultation, and analysis of this information through the e -TRIPS 
Gateway, an easy -to use interface to search and display information related to the TRIPS Council . 
The Secretariat was available to respond to any question in that regard.  He also referred to the latest  
"Annual Report on Notifications and other Information Flows " issued by the Secretariat in 
March  2022 in document IP/C/W/687/Rev.1 , which summarize d submission rates and identifies 
trends for each of the primary TRIPS transparency mechanisms and would be updated ahead of the 
first form al meeting of the TRIPS Council in 202 3.  
9.  The Council took note  of the notifications and the statements made.  
2  REVIEWS OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION  
10.  The Chair recalled that the Council was preparing for the review of the national implementing 
legislation of Samoa. As had been agreed at the end of last year, the Council would wait for the 
notification of Samoa 's revised legislation following their 2018 accession to a number of World 
Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) treaties1 before commencing the review. He proposed that 
the Secretariat remain in contact with Samoa on the progress of its new legislation; and that the 
Council revert to the arrangements for Samoa 's review at its next meeting. While there were no 
current revie ws pending, he said Members should feel free to revert to any matter raised in past 
reviews, or to make suggestions regarding further reviews. He would further welcome ideas on how 
to make best use of this agenda item.  
11.  The Council took note  of the informat ion provided and agreed  to schedule the arrangements for 
the review of Samoa 's national implementation legislation as proposed by the Chair.  
3  IP AND COVID -19 
12.  The Chair recalled that, at its last formal meeting, the Council had agreed to discuss the 
followin g three topics under this agenda item:  
a. IP-related domestic measures taken by Members in the context of the COVID -19 
pandemic. In light of broad support, in principle, for a continuation of the exchange s of 
views on measures undertaken as the pandemic persi sted. The Chair once again referred 
to the compilation "COVID -19: Measures Regarding Trade -Related Intellectual Property 
Rights " on the WTO website which contained a non -exhaustive list of IP -related measures 
taken in the context of COVID -19, compiled by t he Secretariat from official sources and 
verified by the Members concerned . That the list was being updated continuously, even if 
 
1 Samoa acceded to the WIPO Madrid Agreement and Protocol in 2018, and to the Patent Cooperation 
Treaty, the Geneva Act of the Hague Agreement, and the Geneva Act of the Lisbon Agreement in 2019.  IP/C/M/106  
 
- 4 - 
 
  there had been no recent changes to the document. He encouraged Members to inform 
the Secretariat of any measures which should  be included on the list, as well as any update 
or information on the expiry – or end of application – of such measures.  
b. Under paragraph 24 of the Declaration on the WTO Response to the COVID -19 Pandemic 
and Preparedness for Future Pandemics  the Council was mandated to continue or initiate 
work to analy se lessons learned and challenges experienced during the COVID -19 
pandemic. Given that the Council had already initiated discussions on COVID -19-related 
experiences in the field of IP under this agenda item since June 2020, delegations continue 
these exchanges, as directed by paragraph 24 of the Declaration, and that the Council 
would treat any proposals that Members might make in this regard under this item.  
c. Paragraph 5 of the Decision on the TRIPS Agreement required Members to "communicate 
to the Council for TRIPS any measure related to the implementation of the Decision, 
including the granting of an authorization " as soon as possible after the adoption of the 
measure. It had been agreed at the last meeting that, to the extent that such 
communications were not already covered by notifications of laws and regulations under 
item 1, the  Council would provide an update on such communication under this agenda 
item. In this regard, he noted that no communications under paragraph 5 of the Ministerial 
Decision had been received to date.  
13.  The Chair opened the floor for any intervention on the t hree aspects treated under this agenda 
item. 
14.  The representatives  of South Africa , Switzerland  and Sri Lanka  took the floor.  
15.  The Chair proposed to revert to the item at the next meeting to ensure that the exchanges 
could continue, including on the basis of the following:  
a. the updated Secretariat compilation of COVID -19 related IP measures,  
b. any communications  that might be received from Me mbers under paragraph 5 of the 
MC12  TRIPS Decision, and  
c. any proposals Members might wish to make in the context of paragraph 24 of the WTO 
Declaration on Pandemic Response.  
16.  The Council took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this item at its next 
meeting.  
4  REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B)  
5  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND THE CONVENTION ON 
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY  
6  PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE  
17.  The Chair proposed to address thes e three agenda items together. He recalled that one tool for 
the review under item 4 was the information provided by Members in response to list s of questions 
on Article 27.3(b). He said that the latest Annual Report on Notifications and other Information Flows 
circulated by the Secretariat illustrated that responses to that checklist had been rather sparse 
recently . So far , only 28 Members had responded to the lists of questions on Article  27.3(b). The 
Chair thus encouraged Members to submit responses to t hese checklists, and to update their 
previous submissions if they were out of date . 
18.  The Chair noted that two long -standing procedural issues had been discussed extensively on 
the record at every regular meeting of the Council for almost ten years. The firs t was  the suggestion 
for the Secretariat to update three factual notes on the Council 's discussions on the TRIPS and CBD 
and related items; these notes were initially prepared in 2002 and last updated in 2006. The second 
was the request to invite the CBD S ecretariat to brief the Council on the Nagoya Protocol to the CBD, 
initially proposed in October 2010.  IP/C/M/106  
 
- 5 - 
 
  19.  The Chair noted that the delegations ' positions on these issues were well -known and had already 
extensively recorded in the Council 's minutes and therefo re suggested that delegations focus their 
interventions on suggestions on how to resolve the differences and on how make progress on 
substantive issues.  
20.  The representatives of South Africa ; India; Bangladesh ; Sri Lanka ; Indonesia , Brazil ; Nigeria ; 
Peru; United States  of America ; Japan ; South Africa ; Korea , Republic of  and China  took the floor.  
21.  The Council took no te of the statements made and agreed  to revert to these matters  at its next 
meeting.  
7  ANNUAL REVIEW OF THE SPECIAL COMPULSORY LICENSING SYST EM (PARAGRAPH 7 
OF THE ANNEX TO THE AMENDED TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE 
DECISION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF PARAGRAPH 6 OF THE DOHA DECLARATION ON 
THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND PUBLIC HEALTH)  
22.  The Chair recalled that, paragraph 7 of the Annex to the amen ded TRIPS Agreement and 
paragraph 8 of the 2003 Waiver Decision required the Council to review the functioning of the System 
annually, with a view to ensuring its effective operation. They also required the Council to report 
annually on the System 's operat ion to the General Council. In the case of the Waiver Decision, this 
review was also deemed to fulfil the requirements of Article IX:4 of the WTO Agreement.  
23.  The Chair updated Members on the status of acceptances of the TRIPS Protocol. The current 
period for accepting it ran until 31 December 202 3. To date, 136 WTO Members  had accepted th e 
amend ment to the  TRIPS Agreement . In other words, 28 Members were yet to accept t he Protocol 
Amending the TRIPS Agreement. He encouraged those Members to complete their domestic 
procedures and deposit their instrument of acceptance with the WTO Director -General as soon as 
possible.  
24.  When the TRIPS Amendment had entered into force in Jan uary 2017, Members had noted that 
it would be useful to consider how to make this new procurement tool work effectively in practice. 
He therefore encouraged Members to engage in a constructive discussion which could also build on 
earlier reviews, as record ed for instance in the Council 's Annual Review of 2016 (circulated in 
document IP/C/76 ), as well as the Secretariat 's 2016 Report on Technical Cooperation Activities  
(circulated in document IP/C/W/618 ). 
25.  The Chair turned to the Council 's report to the General Council. A draft report had been prepared 
by the Secretariat (circulate d in document JOB/IP/ 62). It had bee n modelled on previous years ' 
reports and contained factual information on the implementation and use of the system. Under the 
section on the Amendment to the TRIPS Agreement, it also included a list of Members who were yet 
to accept the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement. As with past reports, an extract from the 
Council 's minutes on this agenda item would be attached to the report in Annex 1 and Appendix  1. 
26.  The Council  agreed  to adopt the draft report and to attach the record of the discussion.  
8  NON-VIOLATION AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS  
27.  The Chair recalled that the examination of scope and modalities for non -violation and situation 
complaints under TRIPS was in line with the initial m andate in Article 64.3 of the TRIPS Agreement, 
which had required recommendations to be submitted to the Ministerial Conference in 1999.  
28.  He recalled that at the 12th Ministerial Conference, Ministers had adopted a Decision on TRIPS 
non-violation complaints  (document WT/MIN(22)/26 ), which directed the TRIPS Council to continue 
its examination of the scope and modalities for non -violation and situation complaints, and to make 
recommendations to the 13th Ministerial Conference. The Decision also provided that, in the 
meantime, Members wo uld not initiate such complaints under the TRIPS Agreement.  
29.  He said that, during recent meetings of the TRIPS Council, a few delegations had signalled 
openness to return to substantive discussions in this area. In March 2021, his predecessor had 
suggested that Members could identify areas of agreement in the non -violation discussions. 
Identifying such areas or elements of agreement regarding the nature of non -violation and situation IP/C/M/106  
 
- 6 - 
 
  complaints could help delegations focus their engagement on the areas of di sagreement and thus 
make at least some progress in framing the relevant questions for discussion.  
30.  The Chair inquired whether delegations were more at ease now to consider this or any other 
approach that might help identify common ground, in order to get so me movement in this 
long-standing debate.  
31.  The representatives of India; Switzerland ; Argentina ; Sri Lanka ; Brazil ; Canada ; Bangladesh ; 
South Africa ; United Kingdom ; Nigeria ; Indonesia ; Chile; United States  of America ; Peru; 
the Russian Federation ; Bolivia , Plurinational State of ; Korea , Republic of ; Panama ; 
Hong Kong, China ; and the European Union  took the floor.  
32.  The Council took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to this matter at its next 
meeting.  
9  REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 71.1  
33.  The Chair recalled that under this provision, the Council was required to conduct a review of 
the implementation of the Agreement once every two years. However, as the initial review in 1999 
had not been completed, no oth er review had been initiated subsequently.  
34.  The Chair reiterated that this review item ha d long been dormant on the TRIPS Council 's agenda, 
while in other WTO agreements, similar general review mandates had regularly served as an 
opportunity to pursue in -depth discussions of particular aspects of implementation, as agreed by 
Members – often taking place in dedicated thematic sessions.  
35.  He recalled that the recent intensive discussions on the role of intellectu al property  in the 
pandemic response, and on the practical application of TRIPS flexibilities in different WTO Members, 
was only one example of delegations ' keen interest in discussing these and other aspects of the 
implementation of the TRIPS Agreement. Equally intensive engagement on national IP systems was 
noticeable in the context of Trade Policy Reviews, where Members discuss ed detailed questions of 
individual approaches to implementation . He said that other aspects of implementation – such as 
enforcem ent had also been requested as ad hoc  agenda  items in the TRIPS Council in the past , and 
that all this indicate d that there was considerable interest in such implementation -related discussions 
among delegations.  
36.  The Chair said that the review mandated in A rticle 71.1 seem ed to ha ve been intended as a 
forum for exactly this type of discussion . He wished to once again explore whether delegations would 
be ready to consider resuming this review which was, in fact, mandated by the text of the treaty , as 
this wou ld give a more structured and inclusive home to these and similar discussions on the 
Council 's agenda, and could establish a more permanent discussion -culture around examples and 
experiences from implementing the Agreement.  
37.  He said that, taking other practices in the house – such as the SPS or TBT reviews – as an 
example, resum ing the review of the TRIPS Agreement under this item could mean for Members to 
identify, and agree on, selected topics relevant to TRIPS implementation. These could then be 
discussed in dedicated sessions over a two -year period as foreseen in Article  71.1. 
38.  The Chair said that,  having chaired the TRIPS discussions in the last few months,  he took the 
view that  such regular discussions of concrete aspects of TRIPS implementation wou ld be extremely 
useful to delegations. He said that they would not only illustrate Members ' understanding of the 
scope of individual TRIPS obligation  but would also help share concrete technical approaches to their 
implementation in different domestic lega l systems and economies.  
39.  The Council agreed  to revert to the matter at its next meeting.  
10  REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION ON 
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2  
40.  The Chair recalled that Article 24.2 of the TRIPS Agreement r equire d the Council to keep under 
review  the application of the TRIPS provisions on geographical indications.  The principal tool used IP/C/M/106  
 
- 7 - 
 
  for the review was the Checklist of Questions (document IP/C/13  and Add.1 ). He said that , of the 
164 WTO Members, only 52 had respo nded to the Checklist and most of the responses were likely 
to be out of date, because they were submitted well over 10 years ago. T his was despite the fact 
that protection of Geographical Indication s (GIs) was an active area of legal and policy developmen t 
in a number of countries, as well as in a number of FTAs.  
41.  He encouraged delegations to consider submitting responses,  or updating initial responses , so 
that important developments were duly reflected in Members ' contributions.  The e -TRIPS Submission  
System was available as an easy and convenient tool to prepare and submit these responses and 
updates . 
42.  The Chair suggested that Members , in line with the Council 's recommendation made in 
March  2010, also share information on bilateral agreements related t o the protection of GIs which 
they were party to. He stated that this was an area of considerable activity with direct bearing on 
the issue, and the sharing of updated information would be very helpful in promoting transparency . 
43.  The Council  agreed  to rever t to that matter  at its next meeting.  
11  TWENTIETH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE DECISION ON THE 
IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT  
44.  The Chair turned to the Council 's 20th annual review of developed country Members ' reports on 
their implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. Under a Council decision of 
February  2003, developed country Members are to submit annual reports on actions taken or 
planned in pursuance of their commitments under Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement. New detailed 
reports are required every third year, and updates in the intervening years.  
45.  He recalled that in July 2022, the Council had requested developed country Members to submit 
updates t o their seventh set of new detailed reports in time for the present meeting, and the 
Secretariat had since circulated a reminder.2 He also noted that the LDC  Group  had submitted a 
proposal of a template for the submission of reports on commitments of deve loped countries under 
Article  66.2. 
46.  He noted that the Council had received new reports from Switzerland, New Zealand, Australia, 
Norway, Japan, the United Kingdom, Canada, and the United States. Since the circulation of the 
revised draft agenda the Europea n Union had also submitted its report. This documentation was 
being circulated under the new dedicated document series with the symbol IP/C/R/TTI/[Member]/  – 
where "R" stands for "Reports " and "TTI" stands for "Technology Transfer Incentives ". 
47.  He said that paragraph 2 of the Council 's Decis ion on the Implementation of Article  66.2 states 
that the annual review should provide Members with an opportunity to pose questions in relation to 
the information submitted and request additional information; discuss the effectiveness of the 
incentives pr ovided in promoting and encouraging technology transfer to least developed country 
Members in order to enable them to create a sound and viable technological base; and consider any 
points relating to the operation of the reporting procedure established by the Decision.  
48.  Some of the information by developed country Members had been received only very recently, 
and most of it was, so far, available only in its original language. He therefore intended for Members 
to have an opportunity to make further comments at the next meeting of the Council. This would 
give Members a chance to study the information recently circulated and any additional information 
subsequently received.  
49.  The Chair announced that the Secretariat was once again planning to hold the Article 66. 2 
Workshop in March 202 3, back-to-back with the first TRIPS Council meeting of the year.  This would  
allow LDCs sufficient time to absorb the information provided by developed countries in their reports 
and would also ensure that these reports are translate d. It would further be an opportunity to discuss 
the LDC Groups ' proposal for a template for reporting on commitments under this Article. He 
 
2 WTO/AIR/IP/44  of 11 July 2022.  IP/C/M/106  
 
- 8 - 
 
  indicated that the Workshop would comprise two days of workshop sessions, and a reporting and 
review segment within  the first TRIPS Council meeting of 202 3. 
50.  The representatives of the; the European Union ; Australia ; the United Kingdom ; New Zealand ; 
the United States  of America ; Japan ; Switzerland ; Canada ; South Africa ; Bangladesh, on behalf of 
the LDC Group ; and India took the floor.  
51.  The Chair suggested that Members be given an opportunity to continue considering the 
information provided at our next meeting.  
52.  The Council took note  of the statements made and agreed to revert  to the matter at its next 
meeting.  
12  TECHNI CAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY -BUILDING  
53.  The Chair recalled that in July 2022, the Council had agreed to hold the annual review of 
technical cooperation at the present meeting.  
54.  Developed country Members had been requested to update information on their techni cal and 
financial cooperation activities relevant to the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement. Other 
Members who also made available technical cooperation were encouraged to share information on 
these activities. The Secretariat had issued an Airgram on 1 1 July 2022 reminding developed country 
Members of this request. Intergovernmental organizations observers to the Council and the 
WTO Secretariat had also been invited to provide information.  
55.  The Council had received information from the following develope d country Members: 
Switzerland, New Zealand, Australia, Norway, Japan, the United Kingdom, Canada,  and the United 
States. Since the circulation of the revised draft agenda the European Union has also submitted 
information in this regard. These reports are being circulated under the new dedicated document 
series with the symbol IP/C/R/TC/[Member]/  – where "R" stands for "Reports " and "TC" stands for 
"Technical Cooperation ". 
56.  Intergovernmental organizations had also submitted updated information: the United Nations 
Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), the World 
Health Organization (WHO), the World Customs Organization (WCO), and the World Intellectual 
Property Organization (WIPO). Since the circulation of the revised draft agenda, had also submitted 
information in this regard. Their reports were being circulated in the same document series 
IP/C/R/TC/[IGO  observer]/ . 
57.  The report of the WTO Secretariat on technical cooperat ion activities in the TRIPS area was 
available in document IP/C/R/TC/WTO -OMC/3. 
58.  The representatives of the European Union ; the United Kingdom ; the United States  of America ; 
Australia ; Switzerland ; Canada ; New Zealand ; Japan ; Bangladesh, on behalf of the LDC Group ; 
the WTO Secretariat ; the Gulf Cooperation Council  (GCC); the World Intellectual Property 
Organization  (WIPO); and the World Health Organization  (WHO) took the floor.  
59.  The Chair noted that most of the valuable information provided by Members and IGO observers 
had been received only very recently. He would provide delegations an opportunity at the next 
regular meeting to make further comments on the information submitted.  
60.  The Coun cil took note  of the statements made and agreed  to revert to the matter at its next 
meeting.  
13  PARAGRAPH 8 OF THE MINISTERIAL DECISION ON THE TRIPS AGREEMENT ADOPTED 
ON 17 JUNE 2022  
61.  The Chair recalled that under paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision on the  TRIPS Agreement, 
adopted on 17 June 2022, Members had agreed to make a decision within six months from adoption, 
on whether to extend this Decision to cover the production and supply of COVID -19 diagnostics and 
therapeutics.  Since the last formal meeting of the Council in July, Members had held two dedicated IP/C/M/106  
 
- 9 - 
 
  informal open -ended meetings on this issue - on 19  September and on 3 October 2022. At the first 
meeting, Members had shared their views on which key issues would need to be discussed to enable 
Members  to take a decision by the prescribed deadline in December.  
62.  A number of Members had expressed their readiness to move ahead with an extension of the 
Decision to therapeutics and diagnostics. Other Members had called for an evidence - and fact -based 
analysis  to identify supply side constraints and any IP -related barriers to access to individual 
therapeutics and diagnostics. A number of delegations had raised the question of the scope of an 
extension of the Decision, including possibilities for a definition of  'therapeutics and diagnostics '. 
Some delegations also indicated the need for a list of individual products to be covered. After the 
meeting, a number of Members had informally shared their questions and analysis in writing with all 
Members.  
63.  The Chair said that, based on  this discussion, he had set out a schedule of dedicated meetings 
until December in order to map out the path forward, which he had circulated on 
21 September  2022.  
64.  The second dedicated informal open -ended meeting on the issue had taken place on 
3 October  2022. At that meeting, a number of delegations had provided responses to question s 
circulated after the previous meeting. Detailed interventions had given examples of product 
definitions from national legislation, and had shared information on the licensing and supply situation 
of certain therapeutic products used to treat COVID -19. Other delegations had requested evidence 
on concrete IP -related barriers and  indicated that their internal information -gathering and 
consultation exercise s were still on -going. Many delegations had argued that the differences in use, 
production and distribution between vaccines on the one hand, and therapeutics and diagnostics on 
the other, meant that a solution for these products also needed to be different from that for vaccines. 
He said that he had once again invited delegations to share these detailed statements in writing  - and 
he hoped this would be the case soon.  
65.  Most Member s who had taken the floor had also emphasized again that the negotiation process 
on this question should continue in an open, transparent, and inclusive manner, and that all Members 
needed to be heard on the development of any outcome.  
66.  The Chair said that he had reported on these meetings to the General Council on 25 July and 
on 6 October. As mentioned in his last report, while heartened by the engagement and the efforts 
that delegations ha d clearly made – to formulate questions and to provide detailed resp onses – it 
was his sense that Members would need to focus on concrete outcomes of our discussion very soon, 
in order to meet the approaching December deadline. He therefore encourage d delegations to start 
considering which concrete form their respective pr oposed outcome decision should take – and 
ideally propose concrete text, so that other delegations could  take a view on this basis.  
67.  The representatives of South Africa ; Maldives ; Kenya, on behalf of the ACP Group ; Malaysia ; 
Bangladesh, on behalf of the LDC  Group ; Colombia ; Indonesia ; Sri Lanka ; Egypt ; Argentina ; 
Bolivia,  Plurinational  State of ; Brazil ; China ; Uruguay ; Peru; Singapore ; Switzerland ; Chinese Taipei ; 
the United States  of America ; Mexico ; the European Union ; Japan ; Canada ; Korea, Republic of ; 
India; the United Kingdom ; Nigeria ; and the World Health Organization (WHO) took the floor.  
68.  The Chair thanked Members for a rich discussion , and for their serious engagement on this 
matter . He said he was very much aware that the time until 17  December 2022 was short – and 
that, in order to take a meaningful decision by that deadline, Members would have to focus on 
concrete steps very soon. Judging from the interventions at the informal open -ended meetings and 
today, there were currently a wide range  of views held by Members in this regard . In his view, t hey 
include d at least the following positions:  
a. those who wish ed to extend the current decision "as is" to therapeutics and diagnostics 
without any additional language or definition ; 
b. those who wish ed to see concrete evidence of IP barriers before considering an extension 
to therapeutics and diagnostics; and finally  IP/C/M/106  
 
- 10 - 
 
  c. those who were looking to include a defini tion, or to agree a concrete list of products to 
be covered by an extension of the TRIPS Decision to therapeutics and diagnostics.  
69.  In view of the deadline for a decision in December, he said he would suggest the following 
approach. As the Council 's next open -ended informal meeting dedicated to this issue was just over 
two weeks away – scheduled for 2 November 2022  – he urged delegations to use the time until that 
meeting to engage bilaterally and to ad dress concerns and information queries , as t hese would 
otherwise take up too much time in the open -ended meetings.  
70.  He also request ed that, by the time of the next meeting on 2 November, all delegations that 
had a view on what the Council should decide, should make  concrete textual proposals for such a 
Council decision in writing. As he had indicated before, such textual proposals for a decision should 
be circulated in writing before that meeting, so that these could be a basis for discussion at the 
meeting.  These could be position papers, outlines, detailed drafts, or fully formulated decisions  - but 
it was his sense that such concrete textual options were necessary to focus the discussions ahead 
of the December deadline.  He also indicate d that, if the discu ssions d id not concretize on concrete 
textual options at the next meeting, he would consider a more intense consultative process to drive 
this process forward.  
71.  Given that this was the last formal meeting planned for this year, he suggest ed to keep this  
agenda item open with a view to resum ing in formal mode before 17 December in order to take a 
decision as prescribed by para graph  8 of the Ministerial Decision.  
72.  The Council so agreed . 
73.  At a resumed meeting of the Council on 15 December 2022 , the Chair recalled that the Council 
had kept discussions under this item open at its meeting on 12 -13 October 2022. Since then, the 
Council had held informal meetings on this matter on 2 and 22 November, and on 6 and 
15 December, including directly preceding the cu rrent formal meeting. In these meetings, Members 
agreed that the Council should report the state of play of discussions under this item to the General 
Council by the expiry of the deadline specified in paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision.  
74.  Against that background, he had circulated a draft report for a factual and neutral reflection of 
the state of play, as well as for a forward -looking element , on 7 December 2022 in document 
JOB/IP/65  with an invitation for Members to provide comments. The item had also been placed on 
the agenda of the Gene ral Council meeting scheduled for 19 -20 December in the usual fashion.  
75.  He said that, having received comments on the draft, he had held consultations with a group of 
interested Members on 12 and 14 December, and the matter had been  further discussed in an 
open-ended informal meeting of the Council on 15 December, immediately preceding this formal 
session.  
76.  Although these discussions had been inconclusive, he still believed that the amended language 
of his proposed draft report circulated in JOB/IP/65/Rev.1  was the best chance of reac hing 
consensus. He said he would refrain from reading out the entire text at this meeting, and simply 
propose that the Council adopt the draft report as circulated in document JOB/IP/65/Rev.1 . 
77.  The representatives of South Africa ; Sri Lanka ; Switzerland ; the United Kingdom ; the 
United  States  of America ; and the European Union  took the floor.  
78.  Resuming in formal mode later on the same day , the Chair said it was his impression that there 
was no consensus on adopting a report to the General Council under this agenda item, and t hat he 
would therefore report to the General Council under his own responsibility next week.  
79.  The representatives of Sri Lanka ; South Africa ; Switzerland ; the United Kingdom ; Tanzania ; 
Singapore ; and Egypt  took the floor.  
80.  The Chair said he would suspend the  agenda item one more time, and that he would call a 
meeting the following day, if Members would be able to find an agreed solution that could then be 
adopted by all Members.  IP/C/M/106  
 
- 11 - 
 
  81.  At a resumed meeting of the Council on 16 December 2022  the Chair proposed that the following 
text – also displayed on the screen in the room – be adopted as the Council 's report to the General 
Council : 
"In view of paragraph 8 of the Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement adopted on 
17 June 2022 providing that  
[n]o later than six months from the date of this Decision, Members will 
decide on its extension to cover the production and supply of COVID -19 
diagnostics and therapeutics  
the TRIPS Council recommends that the General Council extend the deadline. "3 
82.  The Counc il so agreed . 
83.  The representative of Switzerland  took the floor.  
14  INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND INNOVATION: ROLE OF IP TO RAISE FINANCE FOR 
START -UPS 
84.  The Chair said th is item ha d been put on the agenda at the request of  the delegations of  
Australia, Canada, Chil e, the European Union, Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, the Separate Customs 
Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, the United Kingdom, and the United States of 
America. These delegations ha d also submitted a communication on this topic, circulated i n 
document IP/C/W/692  in order to al low Members to prepare for today 's discussion.  
85.  The representatives of Switzerland ; Japan ; the United States  of America ; Australia ; Canada ; 
Chinese Taipei ; Singapore ; the European Union ; the United Kingdom ; Chile; Hong Kong, China ; 
Uruguay ; Mexico ; Switzerland ; South Africa ; India; China ; and Indonesia  took the floor.  
86.  The Council took note of the statements made.  
15  INFORMATION ON RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE IN THE WTO  
87.  The Chair recalled that the purpose of this agenda item was to keep Members informed  of 
developments in other WTO bodies which are relevant to TRIPS matters, so no discussion was 
required. He invited the Secretariat to provide the regular briefing on IP -related iss ues considered 
in the context of individual Members ' trade policy reviews, and in the Director -General 's Monitoring 
Report.  
88.  The representative of the Secretariat  took the floor.  
89.  The Council took note  of the information provided.  
16  OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS  
90.  The Chair said that there continued to be 14 pending requests for observer status in the TRIPS 
Council by intergovernmental organizations. The updated list of requests4, and the information 
provided by these organizations on their respective work and the reasons for their interest in 
observer status was available on the Members ' website.5 
91.  The Council agreed  to revert to the matter at its next meeting.  
92.  The Chair recalled that, at its meeting in November 2012, the Council had agreed to grant ad 
hoc observer status on a meeting -to-meeting basis to the European Free Trade Association (EFTA) . 
 
3 Subsequently circulated as document IP/C/95 . 
4 IP/C/W/52/Rev.14  
5 Availab le at https://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/trips_e/xtrips_e/igo_observer_e.htm . IP/C/M/106  
 
- 12 - 
 
  Since then, this invitation had been renewed at each meeting. The Chair sug gested to invite again 
the EFTA to attend the Council 's next formal meeting on an ad hoc  basis.  
93.  The Council so agreed . 
17  ANNUAL REPORT  
94.  The Chair said that the draft Annual Report of the Council had been circulated  in 
document  JOB/IP/61 and still needed to be  updated in order to reflect the discussions at the present 
meeting. He asked if any delegation would have any comments on the draft at this point. He 
suggested that the Council agrees that the Secretariat be requested to update the draft to reflect 
the di scussions at this meeting. The draft delegations would have one week to comment on the 
updated parts of the draft report.  
95.  The Council so agreed . 
18  OTHER BUSINESS  
96.  The Chair proposed to hold the TRIPS Council on the following dates in 202 3: 
• 16-17 March 2023  
• 14-15 June 2023  
• 9-10 October 2023.6 
97.  The Council so agreed . 
 
__________  
 
6 These dates have been coordinated with WIPO.