RESTRICTED  
  
IP/C/M/75  
 
7 March 2014  
(14-1402)  Page: 1/9  
Council for Trade-Related Aspects of 
Intellectual Property Rights   
 
   
 
MINUTES OF MEETING 
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 25-26 FEBRUARY 2014 
Interim Chairperson: Ambassador Dacio Castillo (Honduras) 
 
 The present document contains the record of the Council for TRIPS meeting held on 
25-26 February 2014. The statements made during th e meeting will be circulated in an addendum 
to the present document.  
 
_______________ 
 
Subjects discussed  
 
1   NOTIFICATIONS UNDER PROV ISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT ........................................ 3
 
2   REVIEWS OF NATIONAL IM PLEMENTING LEGISLATION .............................................. 4  
2.1   Review of the national implem enting legislation of Montenegro ........................................ 4  
2.2   Review of the national implementing  legislation of the Ru ssian Federa tion ......................... 4  
2.3   Follow-up to revi ews already und ertaken ...................................................................... 4  
2.4   Arrangements for the review of the nati onal implementing legislation of Tajikistan .............. 4  
3   REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B) ..................................................... 5  
4   RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND THE CONVENTION ON 
BIOLOGICAL DI VERSITY .................................................................................................. 5  
5   PROTECTION OF TRADITIONA L KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE ..................................... 5  
6   NON-VIOLATION AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS ......................................................... 6  
7   REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT UNDER 
ARTICLE 71.1 .................................................................................................................. . 6 
8   REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION ON 
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATION S UNDER ARTI CLE 24.2 ...................................................... 7  
9   FOLLOW-UP TO THE ELEVENTH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF 
THE DECISION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT .....................................................................................................................  7
 
10   TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY-BUILDING .............................................. 7  
11   CONTRIBUTION OF INTELLECTUA L PROPERTY TO FACILITATE THE 
TRANSFER OF ENVIRONMENTALLY RATIONAL TECHNOLOGY ........................................... 7  IP/C/M/75 
 
- 2 - 
 
  12   IP AND INNOVATION: UNIVER SITY TECHNOLOGY PARTNERSHIPS ........................... 8  
13   CONCERNS WITH RESPECT TO ME ASURES RELATED TO PLAIN PACKAGING 
OF TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND THEIR COMPATIBILITY WITH THE TRIPS 
AGREEMENT .....................................................................................................................  8 
14   INFORMATION ON RELEVANT DEVE LOPMENTS ELSEWHER E IN THE WTO ................. 8  
14.1   Acceptances of the Protocol  Amending the TR IPS Agreement ......................................... 8  
14.2   New a ccession s ....................................................................................................... 8  
15   OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL 
ORGANIZATIONS ............................................................................................................. 8  
16   OTHER BU SINESS ...................................................................................................... 9  
16.1   Invitations to ad hoc obse rvers .................................................................................. 9  
17   ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON .............................................................................. 9  
 IP/C/M/75 
 
- 3 - 
 
  In view of the absence from Geneva of the Chair of the Council, H.E. Mr Alfredo Suescum 
from Panama, the Council elected H.E. Mr Dacio Cast illo from Honduras as an interim Chair for the 
meeting. 
 
1  NOTIFICATIONS UNDER PROVISIONS OF THE AGREEMENT 
1.1.  The Chairman said that, since the Council 's meeting in October 2013, Tajikistan, a new 
Member of the WTO, had made its initial notification of its laws and regulations. The notification 
referred to its laws on trademarks and service marks, geographical indications, inventions, 
industrial designs, and the protection of topograp hies of integrated circuits. The notification was 
being circulated in document IP/N/1/TJK/1, and the texts of those laws were being made available in the sub-series of documents in electronic form on the Documents Online database. 
1.2.  In addition, the Council had received a numbe r of updates to earlier notifications of laws and 
regulations under Article 63.2. of the TRIPS Agreement: 
 Australia had notified Copyright Amendment (International Protection) Regulation 2013; 
 
 Colombia had notified that its Constitutional Court had declared unenforceable on procedural 
grounds a law that it had earlier notified to the Council, namely Law No. 1520 of 2012 
implementing commitments assumed under the Trade Promotion Agreement between 
Colombia and the United States and its Amending Protocol, in the context of trade policy and economic integration; 
 
 Chinese Taipei had notified its amended Pate nt Act and amended Enforcement Rules of the 
Patent Act. The Patent Act implemented th e Paragraph 6 System by providing for the 
possibility to grant special compulsory licences for the production and export of medicines to 
treat HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, malaria and other epidemics to countries with insufficient or no 
manufacturing capacities in the pharmaceutical sector. In addition, it had notified a number of other regulations relating to patent term extension, patent fees, electronic applications 
and awards for the creation of inventions, utility models and designs; 
 
 The Gambia had notified its Copyright Act 2004; 
 
 Croatia had notified its Copyright and Related Rights Act and amendments to that act; and 
 
 Korea had notified its amended Copyright Act. 
 
1.3.  These notifications of laws and regulations we re available in the IP/N/1- series of documents, 
and the actual texts of laws in sub-series of documents in electronic form on the Documents Online 
database. 
1.4.  In addition, Switzerland had provided updated responses to the Checklist of Issues on 
Enforcement circulated in document IP/N/6/2. 
1.5.  As regards notifications of contact points  under Article 69 for the exchange of information 
and cooperation on trade in infringing goods, since the Council's meeting in October 2013, an 
update to a contact point notified earlier had been received from Thailand. The information on the Members' transparency toolkit page had been updated accordingly. 
1.6.  The representatives of Switzerland, Columbia, and South Africa took the floor under this 
agenda item.  
1.7.  The Chairman urged those Members whose initial notifications of laws and regulations 
remained incomplete to submit the outstanding material without delay. Equally, he urged other 
Members to fulfil their obligation under the TRIPS Agreement to notify any subsequent amendments of their laws and regulations without de lay after their entry into force. He especially 
encouraged Members to notify changes made to their laws and/or regulations to implement the 
Decision on TRIPS and public health. IP/C/M/75 
 
- 4 - 
 
  1.8.  The representative of the Secretariat updated the Council on its work to improve the 
user-friendliness and cost-effectivene ss of the notification systems.  
1.9.  The Council took note of the statements made. 
2  REVIEWS OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION 
2.1  Review of the national implem enting legislation of Montenegro 
2.1.  The Chairman recalled that the Council had initiated at its meeting in October 2013 the 
review of Montenegro's national implementing legislation. Montenegro had received questions just 
prior to that meeting from the United States, which had been circulated in document IP/C/W/598. 
Since then, the introductory statement made by Mo ntenegro at that meeting, the questions put to 
it by the United States and its responses to th em had been circulated in document IP/Q/MNE/1. 
Since there were no further follow-up questions, he suggested that the review of Montenegro be 
removed from the agenda, it being understood that any delegation should feel free to revert to any 
matter stemming from this review at any time.  
2.2.  The Council so decided. 
2.2  Review of the national implementing  legislation of the Russian Federation 
2.3.  The Chairman recalled that the Council had initiated at its meeting in October 2013 the 
review of the national implementing legislatio n of the Russian Federation. The Council had taken 
note of the notifications submitted by the Russian Federation, as well as the questions put to it in 
advance of the meeting and the responses it had given. Since then, the United States had just posed follow-up questions, which were being circulated in document IP/C/W/589/Add.1.  
2.4.  The representative of the Russian Federation  said that his delegation would provide written 
responses after the meeting.  
2.5.  The Council took note of the statements made  and agreed to revert to the matter at its next 
meeting. 
2.3  Follow-up to reviews already undertaken 
2.6.  The Chairman recalled that the reviews of two Members' national implementing legislation 
that had been initiated at the Council's meetings since April 2001 remained on the Council's 
agenda, namely those of Fiji; and Saint Kitts and Nevis. He urged the delegations concerned to 
provide the outstanding material as soon as possible, so as to allow the Council to complete the follow-up to these reviews. As requested at the Council's last meeting, the Secretariat had contacted the Members in question to remind them of the outstanding materials needed to 
complete the reviews. 
2.7.  The Council took note of the information provided.  
2.4  Arrangements for the review of the nati onal implementing legislation of Tajikistan 
2.8.  The Chairman recalled that, at the Council's meeting in March 2013, the Chair had informed 
the Council that Tajikistan had become a new Member  of the WTO, and that it had agreed to apply 
the TRIPS Agreement no later than the date of its accession to the WTO, without recourse to any 
transitional period. The Council had agreed to revert to the arrangements for the review of its 
national implementing legislation once it had received Tajikistan's initial notification of its TRIPS implementation. As indicated under item 1, Tajikistan had now made its initial notification of its TRIPS implementing laws and regulations.  
2.9.  In scheduling the review of the implementi ng legislation of Tajikistan, the Council should 
reserve enough time for other Members to prepare questions to be posed to it in the context of this review, and should also ensure that Tajikistan has sufficient time to prepare its responses. 
Accordingly, he suggested that the Council sched ule the review for the Council's third meeting 
taking place on 28-29 October 2014. IP/C/M/75 
 
- 5 - 
 
  2.10.  In accordance with the standard procedures for the review, he proposed that the Council set 
the following target dates for the submission  of questions and answers in this review: 
- questions should normally be submitted to Tajikistan, with a copy to the Secretariat, 
10 weeks before the date of 19 August 2014; 
- responses to questions posed within that deadline should normally be submitted four 
weeks before the date of 30 September 2014. 
2.11.  The Council so agreed.  
3  REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B) 4  RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND THE CONVENTION ON 
BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY 
5  PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE 
5.1.  The Chairman suggested that the Council  continue to discuss the three agenda items 
together on the basis of contributions by Members. He said the Chair of the Council, Ambassador 
Suescum, had informed him that, as requested by the Council at its meeting in October 2013, the 
Chair had continued his consultations on the suggestions that the CBD Secretariat be invited to 
brief the Council on the Nagoya Protocol that had been adopted at the tenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the CBD held in Nagoya, Japan in October 2010. Furthermore, at that 
meeting, the Council had also requested him to consult on the proposal Ecuador made at the 
Council's meeting in November 2012 that the Secretariat be requested to update the three factual notes that summarize the points delegations have made in the Council's past discussions on the review of the provisions of Article 27.3(b); on  the relationship between TRIPS and CBD; and 
protection of traditional knowledge and folklore. In light of the consultations he had held in 
preparation for this meeting, he unfortunately was not in a position to report any new developments in delegations' positions on these two matters. 
5.2.  In these consultations, some delegations ha d expressed an interest in a factual background 
briefing on the relationship between TRIPS and CBD to be organized by the Secretariat. In 
response to this request, the Secretariat had held  a briefing on this topic in the afternoon of 
24 February 2014. Its purpose had been to provide factual background information on the topic to 
delegations in order to enable them to engage in substantive discussions and to facilitate the Council's consideration of this matter. 
5.3.  The representatives of Angola on behalf of  the LDC Group, India, Indonesia, Brazil, China, 
Ecuador, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Bangladesh, Chile, Peru, South Africa, Cuba, the 
Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Egypt, Columbia, the United States, Nigeria on behalf of the 
African Group and Japan took the floor.  
5.4.  In light of the discussion , the Chairman suggested that the Council request the Chair to 
continue consulting on the suggestions that the CBD Secretariat be invited to brief the Council on 
the outcome of the Nagoya meeting,  and that the Secretariat be requested to update three factual 
notes that summarize the points delegations had made in the Council's past discussions on these 
three agenda items. As to the proposal that the WIPO Secretariat brief the Council on the on-going work of the WIPO Intergovernmental Committee on  Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, 
Traditional Knowledge and Folklore, the Chair noted that, as an observer in the Council, the WIPO 
Secretariat could request the floor whenever it deemed necessary. In addition, he said that he 
would inform the Director-General of the Council's discussion on the Director-General's consultative process on TRIPS implementation issues as mandated by the Hong Kong Ministerial 
Conference. 
5.5.  The Council took note of the statements made and so agreed.  IP/C/M/75 
 
- 6 - 
 
  6  NON-VIOLATION AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS 
6.1.  The Chairman recalled that, at its meeting in October 2013, the Council had agreed to 
recommend that the Ninth Session of the Ministerial Conference decide to extend the moratorium 
on TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints. Pursuant to this recommendation, Ministers had 
directed the TRIPS Council to continue its examination of the scope and modalities for complaints 
of the types provided for under subparagraphs 1(b) and 1(c) of Article XXIII of GATT 1994 and 
make recommendations to their next Session, which they had decided to hold in 2015. It had been 
agreed that, in the meantime, Members would no t initiate such complaints under the TRIPS 
Agreement (WT/L/906). 
6.2.  At the Council's meeting in October 2013, the Chair had reported on the consultations on 
TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints that he had held in preparation of that meeting. At 
that time, he had reported that, at his open-ended informal meetings, delegations had been in 
agreement on a Council recommendation to the Ministerial Conference that it extend the moratorium on TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints until the next Ministerial Conference. 
6.3.  At the same time, Members had indicated readiness to engage in early 2014 in intensified 
work on the examination of the scope and modalities for such complaints with the intent of finding a way out of the current cycle of extending the non-violation moratorium from one Ministerial 
Conference to the next. Furthermore, a number of delegations had said that the briefing that the 
Secretariat had organized in October 2012 to provide factual background information on such complaints had been useful and hoped that, since there had been turnover among delegations, the 
Secretariat would hold another such a briefing to enable them to engage in substantive discussions 
on the matter. At the Council's October meeting, he  had also indicated that he intended to consult 
with delegations in early 2014 on how to organize the Council's intensified work on this matter. 
6.4.  Ambassador Suescum had informed the Chair that, accordingly, he had held two open-ended 
informal meetings earlier in February to consult with delegations on how to organize the Council's 
intensified work on TRIPS non-violation and situation complaints, encouraging them to come prepared with concrete ideas on how to move forward the work. As to any concrete ideas, one 
delegation had said that it was meeting bilaterally with other delegations and hoped to be in a 
position to share such ideas at the present meet ing. Some delegations had underlined the need for 
engagement without offering any specific suggestions. Some other delegations had said that they wished to see similar engagement also on other issues. 
6.5.  In response to the request that the Secretariat hold another briefing on non-violation and 
situation complaints, the Secretariat had held a briefing on this topic in the morning of 24 February. Its purpose had been to provide fa ctual background information on the topic to 
delegations in order to enable them to engage in substantive discussions and to facilitate the 
Council's consideration of this matter. 
6.6.  The representatives of the United States, Braz il, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, China, 
South Africa, Cuba, Canada, India, Ecuador, Paki stan, Japan, Switzerland, the European Union, 
Bangladesh, Argentina, Mexico, Peru, Korea, Nigeria on behalf of the African Group, Angola on 
behalf of the LDC Group and the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela took the floor under this agenda 
item.  
6.7.  The Council took note of the statements made  and agreed to revert to the matter at its next 
meeting.  
7  REVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT UNDER ARTICLE 71.1 
7.1.  No statements were made by Members under this agenda item.  
7.2.  The Council agreed to revert to the matter at its next meeting.  
 IP/C/M/75 
 
- 7 - 
 
  8  REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION ON 
GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2 
8.1.  The Chairman recalled that Article 24.2 prov ided that the Council shall keep under review the 
application of the provisions of the GI Section of the Agreement. The principal tool used to 
coordinate the review process had been a Checkl ist of Questions contained in document IP/C/13 
and Add.1, which a number of Members had submitted, but many had so far not completed. In addition, at its meeting in March 2010, the Counc il had agreed to encourage Members to share 
information on and notify to the Council bilateral agreements related to the protection of 
geographical indications, which they had entered into. 
8.2.  As the question of GI protection remain s of continuing interest and remains a point of 
discussion, he invited those delegations that had not yet provided responses to the Checklist of 
Questions to consider doing so. In line with the Council's recommendation made in March 2010, he 
also encouraged any Member that was party to any bilateral agreements related to the protection of GIs and had not yet shared such information with the Council to do so. 
8.3.  The Council took note of the information prov ided and agreed to revert to the matter at its 
next meeting.  
9  FOLLOW-UP TO THE ELEVENTH ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF THE 
DECISION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT 
9.1.  The Chairman recalled that, at its meeting in October, the Council had taken up the eleventh 
annual review of developed country Members' reports on their implementation of Article 66.2 of 
the TRIPS Agreement. In concluding the item, the Chair had indicated that delegations would be 
provided an opportunity at the present meeting to make further comments on the information 
submitted for that meeting that they had not yet been able to study. 
9.2.  The representatives of Angola on behalf of  the LDC Group and Chile took the floor under this 
agenda item.  
9.3.  The Council took note of the statement made.  
10  TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY-BUILDING 
10.1.  The Chairman recalled that, at its last meeting, the Council had taken up its annual review 
of technical cooperation. Given that some information from Members and intergovernmental 
organizations had been made available only a short time before the review, the Chair had indicated that he would offer a further opportunity to make comments on that material. In 
addition, he recalled that Togo had submitted to the Council just prior to that meeting a 
communication identifying its priority needs for technical and financial cooperation (IP/C/W/597), indicating that it wished to introduce that document at the present meeting.  
10.2.  The representatives of Togo and the Europe an Union took the floor under this agenda item. 
The statements will be reproduced in an addendum to the present record. 
10.3.  The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matter at its next 
meeting.  11  CONTRIBUTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROP ERTY TO FACILITATE THE TRANSFER OF 
ENVIRONMENTALLY RATIONAL TECHNOLOGY 
11.1.  The Chairman said that this item had been  put on the agenda at the written request by the 
delegation of Ecuador. He recalled that, at the Council's meeting in March 2013, Ecuador had 
briefly presented, under "Other Business", its submission entitled "Contribution of Intellectual Property for Facilitating the Tr ansfer of Environmentally Rati onal Technology" (IP/C/W/585 in 
English and French, and IP/C/W/Rev.1 in Spanish). That document had been discussed at the 
Council's meeting of June 2013 under agenda item "Intellectual Property, Climate Change and Development" that had been put on the agenda at  the request of Ecuador. At Ecuador's request, 
the Council had continued this discussion at its meeting in October. IP/C/M/75 
 
- 8 - 
 
  11.2.  The representatives of Ecuador, Cuba, Chile,  El Salvador, the European Union, India, Japan, 
Switzerland, the United States, China, South Africa, Australia, Brazil, and Benin took the floor 
under this agenda item. 
11.3.  The Council took note of the statements made.  
12  IP AND INNOVATION: UNIVERSI TY TECHNOLOGY PARTNERSHIPS 
12.1.  The Chairman said that this agenda item had been put on the agenda at the written request 
by the delegation of the United States. 
12.2.  The representatives of the United States, Australia, Canada, India, Hong Kong, China, the 
European Union, New Zealand, Chinese Taipei, Br azil, Guatemala, Switzerland, El Salvador, and 
Bangladesh took the floor under this agenda item. 
12.3.  The Council took note of the statements made.  
13  CONCERNS WITH RESPECT TO MEASUR ES RELATED TO PLAIN PACKAGING OF 
TOBACCO PRODUCTS AND THEIR COMPAT IBILITY WITH THE TRIPS AGREEMENT 
13.1.  The Chairman said that this agenda item had been put on the agenda at the written request 
by the delegation of Cuba.  
13.2.  The representatives of Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Honduras, Zimbabwe, Ukraine, 
Nicaragua, Indonesia, Australia, New Zealand, Ur uguay, Nigeria, Canada, and Switzerland took the 
floor under this agenda item.  
13.3.  The Council took note of the statements made.  
14  INFORMATION ON RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE IN THE WTO 14.1  Acceptances of the Protocol  Amending the TRIPS Agreement 
14.1.  The Chairman recalled that, at its meeting in October 2013, the Council had agreed to 
forward to the General Council a proposal for a de cision to extend the period of acceptance by 
Members of the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement until 31 December 2015. Pursuant to this 
proposal, the General Council had decided, at its meeting of 26 November 2013, to further extend 
the period for acceptances of the Protocol until 31 December 2015 or such later date as might be decided by the Ministerial Conference (WT/L/899). 
14.2.  As regards the status of acceptances, since the Council's meeting in October 2013, the 
Central African Republic had deposited its instrument of acceptance. To date, 50 instruments of acceptance had been deposited, including the one from the European Union and its member 
States. He encouraged those Members that had not yet notified their acceptance of the Protocol to 
ensure that necessary measures were being taken in their capitals to allow the consideration of the 
acceptance in a timely fashion. 
14.2  New accessions 
14.3.  The Chairman said that the Ninth Minist erial Conference had adopted on 4 December the 
package of accession of Yemen (WT/L/905). In keeping with WTO provisions, Yemen would 
become a Member of the WTO 30 days following the date of the ratification of its protocol of 
accession. 
14.4.  The Council took note of the information provided.  
15  OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS 15.1.  The Chairman said that there remained 12 pending requests for observer status in the 
TRIPS Council by other intergovernmental organizations. The updated list was contained in IP/C/M/75 
 
- 9 - 
 
  document IP/C/W/52/Rev.13. In response to a request by the Council in June 2011, four of them 
had updated the information they had provided earlier, including on the nature of their work and the reasons for their interest in being accorded observer status. These IGOs were the Conférence 
des Ministres de l'Agriculture de l'Afrique de l' Ouest et du Centre (CMA/AOC), the International 
Organization of Vine and Wine (OIV), the South Centre, and the United Nations Environment 
Programme (UNEP). Furthermore, the CBD Secretariat had informed the Secretariat that no update was necessary since it had already renewed its request as recently as 24 November 2010 
by means of a letter addressed to the WTO Director-General. This information was available on the 
Members' website. 
15.2.  The Council took note of the information provided and agreed to revert to the matter at its 
next meeting. 
16  OTHER BUSINESS 
16.1  Invitations to ad hoc observers 16.1.  The Chairman recalled that, at its meetings in June 2010 and November 2012, the Council 
had agreed to grant ad hoc observer status on a meeting-to-meeting basis to the African Regional 
Intellectual Property Organization, the African Intellectual Property Organization, the Cooperation Council of the Arab States of the Gulf, and the Eu ropean Free Trade Association. He suggested that 
the Council again invite ARIPO, OAPI, GCC and EFTA  to attend the Council's next formal meeting 
on an ad hoc basis. 
16.2.  The Council so agreed. 
17  ELECTION OF THE CHAIRPERSON 
17.1.  The Chairman said that the Council's rules of procedure provided that "[t]he election shall 
take place at the first meeting of the year and shall take effect at the end of the meeting", and 
that "[t]he Chairperson […] shall hold office until the end of the first meeting of the following 
year". The normal WTO practice was that the General Council meets in early February and notes a 
consensus on a slate of names of chairpersons for WTO bodies. On the basis of the understanding reached by the General Council, the TRIPS Council then elects, at its first meeting of the year, its 
Chairperson for the coming year. 
17.2.  Exceptionally this year, the General Council's first meeting had been scheduled for 
14 March, at which meeting it was expected to reach agreement on a slate of names for chairs. The TRIPS Council was, therefore, not yet in a positi on to elect its Chair on the basis of the slate of 
names to be established by the General Council. 
17.3.   In light of the consultations Ambassador Suescum had held on this matter, he suggested 
that the TRIPS Council elect its new Chair at the beginning of its following meeting in June, with 
the understanding that, as soon as the General Council has agreed on the slate of names, the 
TRIPS Council Chair-designate can take up his role as the Chair, including holding any consultations in preparation of the Council's June meeting, pending his formal election at that 
meeting. This way of proceeding would avoid the Co uncil having an additional meeting just for the 
purpose of formalizing the election of the Chair-designate. 
17.4.  The Council so agreed. 
__________