RESTRICTED
WT/GC/M/156
17 April 2015
(15-2076)  Page: 1/34
General Council 
20 February 2015   
 
 MINUTES OF THE MEETING 
HELD IN THE CENTRE WILLIAM RAPPARD ON 20 FEBRUARY 2015 
Chairperson: H.E. Mr Jonathan T. Fried (Canada) 
 
Subjects discussed:1 
1   REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE TRADE NEGOTIATIONS COMMITTEE .................... 1  
2   IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI OU TCOMES – STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN ......... 15  
3   PROTOCOL AMENDING THE TRIPS AGREEMENT: UPDATE ON STATUS – 
STATEMENT BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL ...................................................................... 16  
4   WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF 
THE DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMI TTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT ............. 18  
5   REVIEW OF THE EXEMPTION PROVIDED UNDER PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE GATT 
1994  ......................................................................................................................... .... 19  
6   WAIVERS UNDER ARTICLE IX  OF THE WTO AGREEMENT ........................................... 21  
6.1   Jordan – Request for a Waiver relating to the Transitional Period for the Elimination 
of the Export Subsidy Programme for Jordan – Statement by the Chairman of the Council for Trade in  Goods ........................................................................................................... 21
 
7   WTO YOUNG PROFESSIONALS PROGRAMME – STATEMENT BY THE 
DIRECTOR-GENERAL ...................................................................................................... 22  
8   IMPROVING THE GUIDELINES FOR GRANTING INTERGOVERNMENTAL 
ORGANIZATIONS PERMANENT OBSERVER STATUS IN THE WTO – STATEMENT BY 
THE CHAIRMAN .............................................................................................................. 23  
9   COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION - REPORT ON 
MEETINGS OF FE BRUARY 2015  ..................................................................................... 24  
10   APPOINTMENT OF OFFI CERS TO WTO BODIES ........................................................ 25  
11   MERCI GENÈVE – OPEN DAY – STAT EMENT BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL ................ 29  
12   ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES FOR MEMBERS IN ARREARS – STATEMENT BY 
THE CHAIRMAN .............................................................................................................. 30  
13   ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON ................................................................................... 30  
 
 
1  REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE TRADE NEGOTI ATIONS COMMITTEE 
1.1.  The Chairman invited the Director-General, as  Chairman of the TNC, to report on the TNC's 
activities since his last report to the Council. 
                                               
1 The Proposed Agenda was circulated in document WT/GC/W/695. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 2 - 
 
  1.2.  The Director-General, Chairman of the TNC2, said that his last report to the General Council 
had been in December – just days after Member s had adopted the three decisions which put their 
work back on track. 
1.3.  One of those decisions had set the deadline of July 2015 for elaborating a clearly defined 
work program on the remaining issues of the DDA . In the light of that new time-frame Members 
had intensified their work on developing the work program. As Members knew, they had done this by engaging in discussions through a number of parallel, but complementary tracks.  
1.4.  One track was the work conducted by the Chairs of negotiating bodies. This was where the 
more detailed work had been taking place over the past weeks.  
1.5.  Another track was his own consultations as TNC Chair. Those consultations at Ambassadorial 
level had complemented the Chairs' process. The aim of his consultations was to have a deeper 
political discussion in a more interactive format. So far the focus had been on the three core areas 
of Agriculture, NAMA and Services. There had b een an opportunity to try to understand where 
Members were that day on those key issues – and to identify where the gaps and commonalities 
might lie. The Chairs of the three core areas had been invited to those consultations, along with 
Members in a variety of compositions, which had changed as necessary. 
1.6.  He had then provided reports to the full Membership, through the Room W meetings and, at 
that day, through the General Council.  
1.7.  Those so-called "Room W" meetings were the remaining track that he wanted to mention. He 
had launched that process the previous month. Th e meetings were at the Heads of Delegation 
level, and they had met twice so far – on 21 and 29 January. Those meetings allowed for a more 
strategic focus on the work, with the aim of identifying the kind of outcomes that Members could 
collectively pursue in the more detailed discussion s in the negotiating groups. They also allowed 
for specific issues that had been discussed in the negotiating groups and elsewhere to be 
communicated to the whole Membership. This was of course essential for maintaining the 
transparent and inclusive approach which had been so important in the lead up to Bali.  
1.8.  These complementary tracks had formed the spine of Members' efforts. The approach had 
allowed for a level of informality that brought with it the necessary flexibility to ensure more 
honest and direct conversations, while maintaining transparency and inclusiveness.  
1.9.  On 19 February, he had convened a meeting of  the Chairs of the negotiating groups to review 
the progress made to date. Some Chairs had alre ady circulated more detailed written reports on 
their activities, the progress made so far and their next steps. So he encouraged all Members to 
look at those reports.  
1.10.  He said he would now provide a quick overview of progress in each of the negotiating 
groups before providing his own assessment. This was based mostly on what the Chairs had 
reported to him.  
1.11.  In Agriculture, the Chair of the Special Session had been carrying out consultations in a 
variety of configurations including an informal meeting of the Special Session on 28 January. He 
had also consulted on public stockholding for food security purposes. A report on those consultations was contained in document JOB/AG/35.   
1.12.  Concerning the work program, the focus in the consultations so far had been mostly on the 
domestic support and market access pillars. However that did not mean that they were more 
important than other issues. As the Chair had emphasised, it was clear that all elements within the agriculture framework were inter-related and there seemed to be a general acceptance that they 
would need to be dealt with as an overall package.  
1.13.  There had been a good level of attendance and engagement at those consultations which 
had highlighted the growing realisation among Memb ers that the key issues needed to be tackled 
in a detailed and concrete way. Delegations were beginning to get down to the substance, and this 
                                               
2 The Director-General's statement was subsequently circulated in JOB/GC/74. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 3 - 
 
  needed to continue and intensify. With that in mi nd the Chair would be continuing his consultations 
and would convene an informal meeting of the Special Session in the near future. 
1.14.  In the Negotiating Group on Market Access,  the Chair had held intensive bilateral meetings 
with Members. The details of those consultations had been circulated to Members in a report by 
the Chair in JOB/MA/115. The main focus of the Chair's consultations had been on tariffs. The 
consultations had shown that work should mainly focus on the so-called "formula-applying Members", in a first stage. Certain ideas had been orally presented on an alternative approach to 
the Swiss Formula in Rev.3. As the Chair had noted in his report, at that stage those were only 
ideas which would need, at some point in time, to be translated into more concrete proposals. 
1.15.  An open-ended meeting of the Negotiating Group had been convened for 2 March to discuss 
the observations from those consultations and for information-sharing on activities amongst 
Members in respect of NTBs. 
1.16.  In the Services Special Session, over the past few weeks the Chair had consulted over 
forty delegations, in a variety of configurations, on the next step toward the services component of 
the work programme. The Chair had circulated an update on those consultations in document 
RD/SERV/123, for discussion at an informal meeting of the Special Session to be held on 24 February. It was hoped that this discussion woul d lead to significantly greater clarity on the 
next step to be taken toward the work programme. 
1.17.  In the Committee on Trade and Development in Special Session, he understood that the 
proponents had tabled two lists of S&D provisions that they would like to be taken up as part of 
the work program. Although the Special Session awaited concrete textual proposals by the 
proponents soon, that was indeed a forward step in this important area of Members' work. He was 
confident that substantive work in the Special Session would begin as soon as textual proposals were tabled by the proponents. A report by the Chairman of the Special Session was contained in 
document TN/CTD/29. 
1.18.  The Chair of the TRIPS Council in Special Session had held consultations on 
2 and 3 February with interested delegations to  prepare for a session of informal information-
sharing, that he had suggested at the last informal open-ended meeting in December. Following 
the feedback from the delegations that had participated in those consultations, the Special Session would hold an informal information session on 23 February which would provide a factual overview of past work in the TRIPS Special Session, followed  by an opportunity for discussion. This meeting 
was held back-to-back with the Regular Session of the TRIPS Council to permit the participation of 
capital-based delegates. 
1.19.  In Rules, the Chair had been conducting bilateral consultations with a range of delegations 
and groupings regarding proposals for a Stocktaking Workshop, and more generally regarding the 
best way to proceed in the Rules negotiations . The Chair had scheduled open-ended informal 
consultations on 26 February where he would provide a detailed report to the full Membership on 
what he had heard from Members regarding the Stocktaking proposal. This would also provide an 
opportunity for further collective reflection on where things stood in the Group, in the context of the work programme. 
1.20.  In the Special Session of the Committee on Trade and Environment, the Chair was 
preparing, together with the Secretariat, an information session on the three items of the 
environment negotiations. This was to follow-up on  what had been agreed at the informal open-
ended meeting in December. The intention of the Session was to refresh delegations' memory and 
help the Special Session gain a better understanding of the state-of-play. The necessary 
preparatory documentation would be circulated th e following week and the information session had 
been tentatively scheduled on 13 March. An invitation would be issued shortly. 
1.21.  In the DSU negotiations, the Chair had presented a formal report in January, in document 
TN/DS/26, reflecting the completion of the "horizontal process" initiated in 2013. As reflected in 
the Chair's report, this work had led to the pr esentation of "conceptual elements" of possible 
solutions in all twelve issues under discussion. These elements did not, at that stage, reflect full 
convergence. Nor did all participants perceive those elements, taken together, as necessarily 
reflecting an adequate overall balance of interests. In his report, the Chair had expressed his view WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 4 - 
 
  that this horizontal process and the elements pres ented in this context, combined with previous 
work, had the potential to greatly facilitate the development of meaningful and achievable improvements and clarifications to the DSU.   
1.22.  His overview was that he believed that Members had had a productive start to the intensive 
process that they had launched in January. In the past few weeks, Members had started to engage 
more substantively – particularly in the three core areas. Progress was slow, but they were moving forward.    
1.23.  Substantive positions had not changed a great deal since the last time those issues were 
discussed, but the tone of the discussions had been more positive. And from his conversations with 
Ministers he was confident that there was then real  political will behind their work. This was truly 
invaluable. They then had to use the momentum that they had. 
1.24.  It was also encouraging that Members seemed ready to engage and entertain new thinking 
in a number of areas. Some ideas that had been informally floated in very vague terms in earlier consultations were then being further discussed. Th at was very important. They were trying to 
identify a path towards convergence in a way that was creative but which also built on the work 
that they had done up until then. 
1.25.  It was instructive that in some areas, Members were still at the stage of either information 
sessions or stocktaking on the status of work. Effectively they were doing this to refresh their 
collective memory about what had happened previously, as he was sure that many Members did not recall the precise detail of negotiations from ten years before. While those sessions were useful, Members needed to move past that stage in order to make progress.  
1.26.  If Members were to do this then they n eeded to be ready, willing and able to discuss the 
shape of the deals that they believed to be achievable. At that point everyone had a different scenario in mind – and if they were going to test them then they needed to share them with each 
other. By doing that they would be able to see whether those scenarios could collectively and 
progressively move them towards convergence at some point in time. 
1.27.  As he saw it, to find solutions Members needed to move away from general statements of 
what they hoped was desirable, and also away from finger pointing, to a situation where:  
a. they identified more clearly the problems and challenges ahead of them, and 
b. they explored potential solutions for each of those problems and challenges. 
1.28.  He stressed that he was not suggesting  that Members moved away from the existing 
mandates or guiding principles. He was simply suggesting that they had to explore alternative 
approaches and alternative paths which fit within those mandates and principles.  
1.29.  This conversation would be deepened over the next two or three weeks under the Chairs' 
process. As ever, the key word was "doability". This meant what was doable for all Members – not 
just for some. All Members had redlines and sensitivities, both as demandeurs and as contributors. And they had more clarity on this then than they had had for some time. So they needed to 
continue working in a constructive spirit to try and work around those sensitivities and find 
creative solutions. 
1.30.  He once again urged Members to talk directly to each other and not just try to communicate 
through him, or through the Chairs. Direct dialogue among themselves would be crucial. 
1.31.  And while Agriculture, NAMA and Services remained core issues, he stressed again that 
everything was on the table. Discussions should continue in all of the Negotiating Groups, because once Members saw movement in one area, they would need to be ready to move in all areas. 
There would not be time to catch up. In this context the information sharing sessions were very 
important, because many of them, like he had said, were not familiar with issues that had been negotiated almost a decade ago.  WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 5 - 
 
  1.32.  He also stressed again that development remained a central element of this work, and that 
it would remain so in all of their conversations as they moved forward. This applied to LDC issues as well, and he was grateful for the very helpful and constructive session which he had with the LDC Group at their retreat earlier that week.  
1.33.  In the coming days he would be away from Geneva to continue engaging with capitals. He 
would be visiting Chile, Paraguay, Brazil and Germany. The Chairs would continue to advance their work during that period – and he would be kept fully informed of what was happening there. When 
he returned he intended to continue his consulta tions – and convene further meetings in Room W. 
1.34.  Time was moving on – and July was fast ap proaching. Yet Members still had a long distance 
to travel. They were committed to agreeing a clear, detailed, modalities-like work programme, 
which would lead to a rapid conclusion of the Ro und. General statements would not achieve that 
goal. The only way that they could do so was to be much more focused and more interactive.  
1.35.  Members had to talk to each other much more, in an open and constructive way, and they 
had to be ready to explore scenarios. They needed  to get into a solution-finding mode. They did 
have real momentum then. So he urged them to use it to move to the next stage. 
1.36.  All delegations that spoke thanked the Dire ctor-General, as Chairman of the TNC, for his 
efforts and report, and the Chairs of the Negotiating Groups for their hard work. 
1.37.  The representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, on behalf of the Arab Group, said that 
Members were at a critical juncture of their work towards reaching a clear post-Bali work program. 
They had about five months to finalise their work program within the agreed deadline. The Arab Group maintained its continuous support towards the Multilateral Trading System and the 
successful conclusion of the Doha Development Agenda. The Group confirmed its commitment 
towards respecting the designs on the implementati on of the Bali Decisions, calling on Members to 
work together to finalise the post-Bali work program by July 2015. 
1.38.  The work program should balance the interests of all WTO Members. All elements of the 
negotiations should be taken into account in the work program with equal priority keeping developing and least-developed countries' special needs and interests at the forefront. The special 
situation of Recently-Acceded Members, wh o had undertaken extensive market access 
commitments at the time of their accession, should  also be considered. In this context, Members 
should build on the work undertaken in the last decade and ensure that the negotiated outcome 
was balanced. The Arab Group also firmly believed that the development dimension of the DDA 
should remain the overarching principle of the po st-Bali work program. The Arab Group reiterated 
its commitment to the Multilateral Trading System and remained ready to engage constructively in the work ahead. 
1.39.  The representative of Burkina Faso, on beha lf of the C-4, said the C-4 fully supported the 
positions which would be expressed by the Africa n Group, the LDCs and the ACP at the meeting. 
The C-4 stressed that given the importance of the cotton-producing activities in the African 
Countries and to producers of cotton in LDCs, and because of the difficulties that still remained in 
the cotton sector, it was absolutely essential that this vital and major issue should be on the work program to be completed before the end of July 2015. 
1.40.  With respect to the Bali Decision on Cotto n, the Secretariat had carried out some statistics-
gathering work on the basis of Members' notifi cations on the three pillars – Market Access, 
Domestic Support and Export Subsidies. This ha d served as a basis for the work for the two 
specific meetings done in the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session in 2014 as mandated by 
Ministers in Bali. 
1.41.  During those two meetings, proposals had been  made to have an overall view of all the data 
collected by the WTO Secretariat, from its question naire circulated in February inviting Members to 
offer information on their domestic policies in co tton-related issues in the three areas – Market 
Access, Domestic Support and Export Subsidies. The C-4 invited all WTO Members to answer the 
questionnaire as the information supplied would help the future work on Cotton. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 6 - 
 
  1.42.  The C-4 appealed to all stakeholders and all Members to give Cotton a high priority and to 
ensure that the appropriate solutions were found for the cotton-related issues. This should form an integral part of the agreements to be reached in  Nairobi at the end of 2015. The C-4 was ready to 
enter into substantive discussions. 
1.43.  His time as coordinator of the C-4 would be concluding very soon. In his term, he was 
grateful to have had the full support of his colleagues Ambassador Bamanga Abbas (Chad), Ambassador Séraphin Lissassi (Benin), Ambassado r Aya Thiam Diallo (Mali) and the competent 
experts of the four C-4 Members in Geneva. He was grateful to the Director-General for the 
excellent working relation he had enjoyed with him and made a special mention to Ambassador John Adank (New Zealand) with whom the C-4 had done all that was possible to try and find a solution to the Cotton issue. He also thanked all colleagues from all delegations and groups in the 
WTO for their cooperation. 
1.44.  The representative of Chinese Taipei, on beha lf of the RAMs Group, reiterated that the three 
core issues – Agriculture, NAMA and Services – should move in parallel and should be tackled 
together. Sequencing was just not workable, and therefore not a viable option. 
1.45.  The post-Bali work program should be doable , and the level of ambition should be realistic 
and affordable for everyone. However, being "realistic" did not mean having "no ambition". 
Members should achieve a credible outcome that carried them on to conclude the DDA. If Members 
failed to deliver the DDA Package as envisaged in the Doha Ministerial Declaration, the RAMs would undoubtedly be among the worst affected Members of the whole WTO family. 
1.46.  The 2008 modalities texts – Rev 4 for Agriculture and Rev 3 for NAMA - had been heard and 
believed to be the starting points most preferre d by Members as the basis for their future work 
while some Members had raised the idea of "new alternatives" or "new approaches." The RAMs Group urged those Members to translate their ideas into proposals as soon as possible to enable 
others to explore and consider all the possibilities. However, negotiations should consider the 
special flexibility needs of developing count ry Members and the recently-acceded Members. 
1.47.  The special situation of the RAMs, who had made exceptionally deep and extensive 
commitments in the course of their accession processes, should be taken into full account in the 
future negotiations as mandated in both the Do ha and the Hong Kong Ministerial Declarations. 
1.48.  The extensive and deep commitments already made by the RAMs Group could be observed 
in document TN/AG/W/9 recently produced by the Se cretariat, on the subject of agriculture market 
access across all WTO Members. Generally speaking, the average bound rates and applied rates of 
the RAMs Members were lower than those of other WTO Members. RAMs Members had also committed to a lower percentage of tariff peaks but a higher percentage of duty-free tariff lines, 
often even higher than the commitments made by some developed Members. 
1.49.  The RAMs Group strongly urged all Members to make their commitments equivalent to the 
level already made by the RAMs in this current Round. The Group stood ready to engage fully with 
other Members to do its best to complete the work programme by the end of July. 
1.50.  On behalf the Separate Customs Territory of Taiwan, Penghu, Kinmen and Matsu, she noted 
that the recent discussions on the post-Bali work program mainly focused on the market access issues in Agriculture, NAMA and Services. She reminded Members that some non-market access 
issues also dealt with measures that could cause trade distortion, affecting market access, such as 
anti-dumping measures. Those should be addressed together with the market access issues. 
1.51.  The representative of Brazil agreed with the Director-General that in the last weeks 
Members had moved into a new stage of engagement. He would not restate the positions of Brazil 
on that occasion. He had done so many times and Members were aware of what Brazil thought, as 
his delegation was of the views of all fellow Members. 
1.52.  Brazil believed in the need for and would continue to strive towards a work program that 
could provide meaningful results in the core areas of the Round, particularly in all three pillars of Agriculture and the issue of Cotton. That was an imperative if Members were to complete a Development Round worthy of its name and mandate. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 7 - 
 
  1.53.  He said that he would be in Brasília and São Paulo in the coming two weeks to talk to all 
involved areas of government and to the private sector and opinion-makers on Members' work in Geneva. He would also accompany the Director-General's visit to Brasília. Although his colleagues there were perfectly up-to-date of what was going on  in Geneva and of the context they were in, it 
would be helpful to his work to get a direct feel of circumstances, views and expectations in Brazil 
and to have face-to-face meetings with the officials who would coordinate to provide the guidance his delegation would need as negotiations accelerated and became more detailed. Brazil was ready 
and would be even more prepared for that phase which, he hoped, was just around the corner. In 
the meantime, his delegation would always remain ready to engage. 
1.54.  The representative of the United States said that the past few weeks had, in his delegation's 
view, been a relatively productive  period in Members' development of a post-Bali work program for 
the DDA. Compared to the work they had done in 2013, they then were aiming much more directly 
at substance, tackling hard issues, and engaging in meaningful exchanges. The variable formations and groupings were playing a useful role in fostering this more substantive discussion. Discussions 
were gradually becoming more horizontal, which was also very useful. The substance itself, of 
course, remained extremely difficult for all of them. 
1.55.  Members had been in a necessary process of "connecting the dots" in the current landscape 
of the DDA and dealing honestly and directly with the picture that was revealed. When they 
connected the dots, what was revealed, undeniably,  was that they were nowhere near consensus. 
They were quite distant from a common view of what a work program should look like, or how it could realistically enable them to conclude the Round in a manner that worked for everyone, and 
that could be accomplished in a relatively rapid timeframe. 
1.56.  To illustrate what he meant by a lack of consensus, he would cite the fact that there were 
clear indications from a number of Members, both developed and developing, that Rev.3 in NAMA 
was not a viable basis for concluding their negotiations, while others remained attached to that 
text. Another example was the very stark presentation of facts regarding Rev.4, demonstrating that only one Member –namely, the United States– would be required to cut into current domestic 
support programs, while Members whose programs had grown exponentially since 2008 would 
make no meaningful contribution. Meanwhile, those Members had stated clearly their expectation that this mind-boggling imbalance, which would clearly fall short of any true effort to reform trade-distorting agricultural subsidies, should be pres erved. Using the lexicon of the WTO, the United 
States viewed that as blood for water –or, blood for air– which was simply not an outcome that his 
delegation could endorse. 
1.57.  Those reminders of the size of Members' gaps were discouraging, but this was not a 
surprising set of circumstances. The road to a productive conversation should start with the 
recognition of some realities. Members had ha d some tough discussions, but then they had a 
clearer understanding of the choice facing them. In  the United States' view, they should continue 
to recalibrate. They were collectively better posi tioned than they had been a few weeks ago to 
really start tackling the question of what recalibration meant. 
1.58.  As Members prepared for this next phase, it might be useful that day to clarify a few 
aspects of the US position on their work. During on e of their recent informal meetings in Room W, 
there had been a refreshingly direct exchange on the concept of "differentiation" in the roles and 
contributions of developing country Members. He had appreciated the very direct views expressed 
by his colleagues on this important question, which had helped them understand, again, the 
significance of some of the gaps they confronted. This was a term that he had first heard in a 
discussion among developing countries when he had attended an African Trade Ministers forum in Ghana several years before. But he did want to be clear about what the United States did, and did 
not, mean when it refe rred to differentiation.  
1.59.  The United States did not mean that it was seeking a new categorization of Members within 
the WTO. It was not talking about "graduation." It  recognized such a discussion would result in 
endless debate and no outcome, and furthermore it was not what Members needed in order to 
accomplish a reasonable outcome. 
1.60.  What the United States meant, for example, was that a developing country Member that at 
present maintained very significant agricult ural domestic support programmes and had the WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 8 - 
 
  productive capacity to affect global markets would necessarily have to participate in negotiations, 
and contribute to outcomes, in ways that were different than developing countries that did not have such programmes. Such developing countries were different from other developing countries, 
and Members could not succeed if they pretended othe rwise. He also made it clear that the United 
States was not seeking new market access outcomes in Doha from those WTO Members who 
would not have applied the formula under the existing NAMA framework.  
1.61.  In talking about this kind of differentiation, the United States was not trying to be 
provocative. It was simply trying to prompt an honest discussion of world trade as it currently 
existed and to foster an outcome that reflected re al world trade dynamics. None of this required 
any revision of categories within this institution, but it did implicate the need for a flexible approach that recognised that there could be no one-size-fits-all approach for development. 
1.62.  Finally, he would like to offer a brief word with respect to the interesting ideas the United 
States had heard recently regarding the possibility of a request/offer format in Agriculture and NAMA as part of finding new ways forward. 
1.63.  The United States welcomed this contribu tion to the discussion as a much-needed element 
of the fresh thinking it had long been seeking. His delegation would want to study the idea further and to engage in detail with those proposing it. Initially, his delegation thought it was important to 
be a bit cautious, to the extent that request/offer could prove to be significantly more complex and 
time-consuming than any of the Members might currently envision. However, if ways could be found to frame such an approach with acceptable parameters, including with respect to scope and duration, this could be well worth further expl oration. His delegation remained hopeful that 
outcomes by Nairobi were within the realm of possibilities. 
1.64.  The United States reiterated its view that Members were moving into interesting and at 
least somewhat encouraging new territory. It looked forward to doing its part to sustain this 
momentum. 
1.65.  The representative of Bangladesh, on behalf  of the LDCs, noted that in the last three days, 
the LDC Group had a retreat in Montreux and had deliberated on the progress made so far at the 
WTO. In this retreat, Bangladesh had been given the responsibility of coordinating the LDCs in the 
WTO and looked forward to closely working with its LDC colleagues and all WTO Members to move 
the DDA forward. 2015 was very crucial for the WTO. Members needed to move the Bali process forward and deliver a tangible outcome at MC10 which was going to be held for the first time in an 
African Country. Since the Bali Ministerial, they had made significant progress in many areas. 
Members had adopted the TFA Protocol and had agreed to develop the work program by July 2015, extending the deadline given by the Ministers in Bali. 
1.66.  On LDC-specific issues, Members had a prelim inary discussion on rules of origin at the High-
Level Meeting of the Council for Trade in Services on 5 February. This demonstrated good progress in their work. However, more remained to be done to have a fruitful outcome by MC10. The Least-
Developed Countries Report 2014 entitled "Growth with Structure Transformation: A post-2015 
Development Agenda" released by UNCTAD revealed that the current account deficit of LDCs was on an upward trend and had reached the historic peak of 40 billion USD. The deficit had resulted 
from the widening imbalance of trade since 2009. The situation was likely to deteriorate further 
due to the decline of commodity prices.  
1.67.  Against this background, it was essential to conclude the DDA where development would be 
the core element. In doing so, the LDC Group wi shed to see the work program on the remaining 
elements of the DDA including the LDC issues fini shed by July 2015. The Group expected that its 
issues would be addressed in all the areas of  the work program by increasing its export 
opportunities. Members should also refrain from any negotiating outcome that could put LDCs at a 
disadvantage against non-LDC Members which could fo rce them to undertake cuts by being part of 
a customs union with the latter. 
1.68.  On Bali Implementation, a very constructive High-Level Meeting on the operationalization of 
the Services Waiver had been held on 5 February. Given the importance that LDCs attached to this 
meeting, the Minister of Commerce of Bangladesh, Hon. Tofail Ahmed, and the Minister of Trade, 
Industry and Cooperatives of Uganda, Hon. Ame lia Kyambadde attended the meeting. The Group WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 9 - 
 
  expressed its profound appreciation to all the de legations that had made positive indications in 
that meeting and looked forward to rece iving the notifications by 31 July 2015. 
1.69.  On Rules of Origin, Members had had a preliminary discussion in the Committee on Rules of 
Origin. The LDCs had submitted their observation on the Rules of Origin currently being applied by 
the preference-giving countries. Members needed to  intensify their discussion on those issues so 
that they could report to their Ministers a positive outcome on the Bali Decision at MC10. On Duty-Free Quota-Free Market Access, the Group was wait ing for positive decisions from the Members 
towards the implementation of this Bali Decision. 
1.70.  On process, the LDC Group requested that the consultations be made as inclusive and as 
transparent as possible. The process laid by the Director-General would be effective if the invitation to those consultations be made "Ambassador+1". This was the only way Coordinators 
could properly represent their respective Groups. The LDCs were definitely ready to engage. 
1.71.  The representative of Lesotho, on behalf  of the African Group, said that the Group had 
participated in the green room consultations and it was abundantly clear that there were 
significant gaps between Members’ positions. In the midst of all this, it was nonetheless 
encouraging to note that Members were fully engaged in the consultation processes. It was further encouraging noting that the discussion was becoming focused and narrowing down to specifics, 
particularly in the area of Agriculture.  
1.72.  The African Group believed that Members sh ould take cognizance of the context within 
which the negotiations on Agriculture subsisted. The reform agenda which had been attendant to 
the outcome of the Uruguay Round in Agriculture was the basic prism from which the African 
Group was approaching the DDA Agriculture negotiat ions. It was therefore a considered view of 
the African Group that a negotiated outcome that  perpetuated the status quo – whereby the WTO 
was left – harboured exclusive rights for the benefit of a select few affluent Members. An outcome 
devoid of disciplining unfair and imbalanced rules codified in the Agreement on Agriculture to the 
detriment of African Countries would be highly unacceptable.  
1.73.  There had been a call to move away from generalities to specificities. All Members had 
expressed readiness to go into that direction, not the least, the African Group. This call was in no 
way suggesting that the Rev.4 text was not sufficiently detailed or specific enough. On its part, the African Group had taken time to review Rev.4 in detail and the results had been telling. Some perpetual challenges had emerged from the review. To date, Africa continued to suffer from the 
adverse effects of subsidies by the big players. Tariff escalation, export restrictions, special 
products, SSM and many other concepts in Rev.4 had proven to be valid. 
1.74.  During the review, it had become abundantly clear that the domestic support pillar had 
undergone significant transformations. The Group was quite aware that Rev.4 concepts ranging 
from OTDS, product specific caps to AMS and de minimis  meant different things to Members. 
Accordingly, the Group welcomed the recently intensified consultation on those concepts. 
1.75.  He drew Members' attention to the vivid change that had occurred in actionable subsidies 
under the green box – which could not be ignored. The Group would be working in this area with a view to subsequently engaging with Members. 
1.76.  The Group had taken note of other Members'  reservations on some elements of Rev.4 and 
ideas on how to drive the process forward. Unfortunately, those reservations and ideas had not 
been transformed from the conceptual domain into  the realm of specificities and details. Short of 
this, total departure from the architecture or structure of Rev.4 would clearly not be viable.  
1.77.  Behind the reservations, concerns and ideas raised so far, particularly on domestic support, 
rested a million dollar question: were the key Members of the WTO currently mustering requisite political will to review their domestic support po licies and address the unfair terms and imbalances 
codified in the Agreement on Agriculture? The Afri can Group considered this question as the very 
nucleus of the challenges Members were facing in agriculture negotiations which basically relegated other concerns raised to being simp ly ancillary. The Group hoped that Members 
confronted the elephant in the room to progress in the consultations currently underway in 
Agriculture and looked forward to engaging with Members. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 10 - 
 
  1.78.  The representative of Barbados, on behalf  of the ACP Group, said that as the Group had 
previously indicated, it placed high importance on the completion of the post-Bali work program on 
concluding the remaining DDA issues and the centrality of the development dimension in the crafting of the detailed modalities that would form the work program.  
1.79.  Ahead of more detailed inputs by the ACP in  the various processes, she wished to signal a 
few areas of consensus on which the Group had committed. The ACP affirmed, as set out in the Bali Ministerial Declaration, that Development, Agriculture including Cotton and LDC outcomes 
should be prioritized and concluded with tangib le, binding results. The Group was pleased that 
some progress had recently been made on LDC issues.  
1.80.  The ACP was also of the view that the draft revised modalities in Agriculture and NAMA 
represented the starting point for discussions. Stabili zed portions of the text should be respected. 
Long-standing preferences and preference erosion, Cotton and specific flexibilities for developing 
countries were critical points of interest for the Group. The need for adequate flexibilities to take into account national and regional situations and to address non-tariff barriers was also critical for 
the Group. Over the next few weeks the ACP would seek to fine-tune its positions on a number of 
other issues and would be open for dialogue on those and other issues. 
1.81.  The ACP had always sought to be a constructive partner in the ongoing discussions. It would 
continue to do so as Members sought to formulate the work programme by the mandated deadline 
– end of July 2015. The Group looked forward to an inclusion in and engagement on various Chair-
like processes to articulate the ACP position on the various issues. She would not wish to further develop for the future course until they had more detailed internal discussions as a Group. In 
concluding, she thanked her predecessor, Ambassador John Kakonge (Kenya), and Ambassador 
Prospero Vokouma (Burkina Faso) for their important contributions to the ACP and wished them well. 
1.82.  The representative of Guatemala, on beha l f  o f  t h e  S V E s ,  s a i d  t h a t  h e  w a s  p l e a s e d  t h a t  
consultations were showing some progress. The SVEs reiterated the importance of conducting this 
process with transparency, inclusiveness and full participation of all Members. Those principles 
were particularly important during the consultation process since meetings were convened in 
different configurations and not all Members participated in them. Therefore, access to information on any development in those meetings was of utmost importance for the whole Membership. 
1.83.  The SVEs were eager to see progress in all areas of the post-Bali work program towards 
concluding the DDA. This progress had to fully and properly reflect the Doha Development 
mandate and maintain development at its core and the required flexibilities and the S&D treatment provisions for SVEs and developing countries. The SVEs expressed its gratitude to all Members for 
their wide recognition of the Group's flexibilities during the last informal TNC. As had been 
mentioned in previous occasions, those flexibilities were necessary for the SVEs taking into account the Group's special circumstances. Granting those flexibilities would not have any impact 
in other Members' ambitions and would certainly make a huge difference for the SVEs in terms of 
economic growth and development. 
1.84.  The representative of the European Union said that Members had gone through a period of 
intensified discussions in various formats, which had proven to be enlightening in many respects. 
The path forward was becoming clearer step by step as they came to grips with each other's 
objectives and constraints in the rapidly changing trading environment. 
1.85.  He stressed that every effort should be made to effectively use the momentum. The success 
of Bali had given the WTO another opportunity, perhaps its last, to come to a successful conclusion 
of the DDA, and it was their fundamental and collective responsibility not to miss that opportunity. They needed to maintain the focus of their effort s on exploring what could be done and achieved 
at present, and not on what they would have liked to get fourteen years before at the time of the 
Round's launch, or seven years before when they had been so close to a deal. 
1.86.  The EU for its part had been clear at each step on the scenario on how it saw negotiations 
unfolding and what would constitute reasonable outcomes in the DDA. The EU was ready to 
continue to look into creative solutions in all areas, as long as everyone else was willing to do the 
same. All of the core issues should be taken forward in parallel and would have to achieve WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 11 - 
 
  commensurate levels of ambition. Still, the EU accepted that Agriculture might determine what 
would and would not be possible in the DDA overall,  keeping in mind, however, that balance would 
be needed within the Agriculture pillar and among all the areas of a possible outcome. 
1.87.  On the next steps, the EU agreed with the Director-General that it was crucial at this stage 
that the necessary technical work was taken forward. The market access pillar – in both 
Agriculture and NAMA – was a particular case in point. The need for a simpler, more realistic 
market access approach had been stressed by  a large number of Members during their 
conversations up until the present. Clarity on options and instruments available could only be 
useful for progressing on other issues. Another example was Services. He welcomed the approach 
outlined by the CTS-SS Chair earlier that week. Useful work on non-core issues like Rules and 
TRIPS could also move forward aiming at exploring what elements could realistically be part first of 
the work programme and then of a possible DDA outcome. 
1.88.  Obviously, technical work would not be enough. He re-emphasized the utmost importance 
of the horizontal part of the work, the testing of each other's scenarios, as the Director-General 
had put it, which, under the circumstances, would necessarily play a central role in ensuring 
appropriate calibration between all areas and would help to guide the individual negotiating groups 
on the direction of work. Dealing with complex proc esses and tasks, the EU expressed again its full 
confidence in the efforts of the Director-General as he organized and facilitated the work on the 
parallel and complementary tasks he had referred to in his report. The EU also recognized the need for Members to do their part in that process. 
1.89.  The first weeks of 2015 had shown that slowly but surely Members were beginning to open 
to the idea and to converge towards the need of exploring possible realistic solutions in all areas. 
This was the mind-set that they needed in order to advance and to keep their July work program deadline and to see concrete results by MC10. 
1.90.  The representative of China associated hi s delegation with the statement made by Chinese 
Taipei on behalf of the RAMs. At the first TNC meeting in 2014, he had said that in the farmer's 
mind, spring had been the season for sowing seeds. Fortunately, with Members' collective labour 
and a bit of luck, 2014 had proven to be a good year both for sowing seeds and harvesting crops. 
The best harvest was the three General Council decisions adopted in 27 November. At present, it was again the season to sow seeds. China was expecting to get a good work program by July and ultimately, a more remarkable harvest by December at MC10 in Nairobi.  
1.91.  There had been a wave of intensive cons ultations among Members in various formats which 
had helped regain momentum. It was true that they had not seen any substantial results but they had a better understanding of each other's concerns, particularly the red lines. This exercise was 
an inevitable yet useful step towards success enabli ng them to have a realistic vision of what was 
desirable and what was achievable. 
1.92.  More importantly, Members had shown their strong commitment to the July post-Bali work 
program. Those commitments were indispensable to the next stage of negotiations. The post-Bali 
work program mattered not only to the credibility of the Doha Round but also to the credibility of the rules-based Multilateral Trading System. All discussions should be based on and fully consistent with the mandate embodied in the Doha Declaration, Hong Kong Declaration, July 
Framework Package and the Bali Declaration. 
1.93.  Before Members proposed any new approach on modalities or would request others to do 
something, they had to prepare answers to such questions as, " Do we have a mandate? " "Can we 
offer something adequate to balance the two ends of the equation? " "Will our request make the 
business more doable or even less doable? " 
1.94.  On domestic support, Members should not mislead the discussions by mixing up support of 
different nature, for different purposes, of different  histories and of different sizes per capita. They 
should be honest and look at whether the support was provided for big rich farmers, export commercial interest or the food security and the li velihood of hundreds of millions of small poor 
farmers; on whether those measures were put in place to directly and actively distort international 
market or to offset the impact of the distorted international market. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 12 - 
 
  1.95.  For the next steps, China believed that Me mbers should build upon the discussions from the 
past few weeks and engage in more substantive an d solution-oriented deliberations on the basis of 
the 2008 modalities text.  
1.96.  Moving to a new stage, Members had to bear in mind some fundamental principles. Re-
calibration should take into account of every Me mber's comfort and acceptability threshold as the 
Director-General had rightly pointed out. China did not want to see a scenario where only few 
Members were suffering the discomfort. Future discussions should be conducted in a more 
transparent, inclusive, fair and scientific manner. They should be very cautious and avoid being led 
into unchartered territory of uncertainty and difficulty. Re-calibration should be done on a non-discriminatory way – if some Members' obligations were readjusted then obligations of other Members should also be readjusted accordingly.  Only win-win solutions could survive. The DDA 
was a development round. Some key principles should be fully reflected throughout the 
negotiations such as special and differential treatment, and less than full reciprocity. The flexibilities already granted to LDCs and SVEs should also be preserved. 
1.97.  Time was not their friend. With only six months left, Members had no time to waste. If they 
had thrown away all they had achieved in the past and started from scratch, they were going 
nowhere. If they chose an unchartered route, they were also going nowhere. Neither of which 
would make their lives easier. China was fully committed and would join hands with other 
Members marching towards their common goal of achieving a doable and commercially meaningful work programme. To that end, China remained open and continued to positively participate in the consultations in various configurations and in any discussion. 
1.98.  The representative of Nigeria agreed with  the Director-General's overall assessment that 
some progress had been made since the beginning of the year due to constructive engagement by 
Members. Nigeria supported the roadmap which the Director-General had clearly outlined on the 
way forward and urged that constructive engagement at Ambassadorial-level should be intensified.  
1.99.  As a Member-driven organization, adherence to the core principles and values, particularly 
the primacy of the multilateral process, inclusiven ess and transparency should be ensured in the 
negotiating process, under the leadership of the Chairpersons of the Negotiating Groups. Nigeria 
also re-affirmed its commitment to engage constr uctively and productively with other Members to 
come up with a clearly defined post-Bali work program. Members should implement all the elements of the Bali Package without delay, particularly the decisions on LDC issues. 
1.100.  His delegation was of the view that, firs t, the post-Bali work program should be derived 
from the Doha mandate, the MC9 mandate by exte nsion, and most importantly, from a fair and 
accurate reflection of the progress made so far in the negotiations. This should be the parameter 
on which the modalities text would be based. 
1.101.  Secondly, Nigeria fully supported the view that since the Doha Round was a development 
round – development issues should therefore re ceive adequate attention and should rightly 
permeate to all areas of the negotiations. A doab le work program should be drafted and should 
deliver on development and achieve a pro-de velopment outcome from the negotiations. 
1.102.  Thirdly, recalibration of Members' expectations for MC10 in Nairobi, Kenya, should not in 
any way lower the levels of ambition of the Doha round negotiations. Nigeria reiterated the need 
for overall balance in the levels of ambition in all areas and considered all areas of negotiations as 
important none of which should be treated to the exclusion of others. However, Agriculture 
remained the gateway and the engine of the entire negotiations. Understandably, it was an area 
where the outcomes of the negotiations would determine the faith of many developing countries, 
including Nigeria, whose economies largely depended on it for their survival. 
1.103.  Finally, Nigeria reiterated the need to build confidence and trust within the entire WTO 
Membership by ensuring that all issues remain ed on the table as reassured by the Director-
General, while technical work, based on consensus, should continue especially, in those areas that were lagging behind, particularly in Agriculture and NAMA. Nigeria was therefore committed to advancing work in all areas, especially on development and other core issues. His delegation called 
on all the major players to show leadership and exercise the requisite flexibilities that would 
ensure a successful and early conclusion of the DDA negotiations. Nigeria supported the WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 13 - 
 
  statements made by Lesotho on behalf of the Af rican Group, Barbados on behalf of the ACP and 
Burkina Faso on behalf of the C-4. 
1.104.  The representative of the Republic of Ko rea said that a good start had been made by 
Members on their work, albeit the progress being somewhat slow. He had seen some encouraging 
signs including sincere engagement among many pa rticipating Members. They all seemed to agree 
that they would work together on the recalibration of the level of ambition. However, the tough question of how they would do this remained una nswered. Therefore, the task awaiting them was 
extremely difficult if not impossible. 
1.105.  As a starting point, Members should have a clear vision on a potential landing zone and 
serious reflections on their must-haves and redlines  keeping "doability" in mind as had been stated 
by the Director-General. Discussions could then ensue to construct the post-Bali work program by 
July. The success of this exercise would require st rong political will, confidence and trust among 
the players in the Council Room, in Geneva and in the respective Capitals. 
1.106.  Members were exploring to chart a new journey to conclude DDA negotiations but they 
were not starting from scratch. There were elements of parameters they could refer to from the 
progress that had been made through long and st renuous efforts so far. However, his delegation 
was open to new ideas and/or approaches so long as they could help them strike the right balance 
of interests and were conducive to the success of their joint undertaking. He encouraged those 
Members with fresh and specific ideas to come up with a concrete concept and to present their proposals and background papers if possible so that they could have more focused and productive discussions. He urged the major players in the room to show greater leadership for the sake of the 
credibility of the multilateral trading system by continuing their proactive engagement in good 
faith among themselves and with the entire Membership. As the legendary Spiderman once said, "with great power comes great responsibility ." 
1.107.  The representative of Cuba subscribed to the statements made by Guatemala on behalf of 
the SVEs and by Barbados on behalf of the ACP. No amount of precaution would be sufficient to 
stress the importance of maintaining transparency and inclusiveness in this crucial time – 
principles that should guide Members in all their work at all times. 
1.108.  The post-Bali work program should take up the challenge of covering and giving due 
attention to all the issues of the Doha Development Agenda – an absolute priority for developing countries. Cuba was not in favour of reinterpreti ng the mandates. Members could try to recalibrate 
and readjust but they should not reinterpret what was in the mandate and should avoid its 
dramatic reversal.  
1.109.  Members had to ensure that the development dimension was carefully preserved in every 
analysis, proposal or initiative put forward. This was another mandate that they could not 
reinterpret. The same applied to the specific flexibilities required by certain groups of Members and even individual countries. All of those flexibilities were well-known and remained on the table 
waiting to be addressed. 
1.110.  Another element that Members should take into account was that if the levels of ambition 
decreased for the big players, the countries which depended the most on world trade for their economic development, or which faced specific limitations of any other kind, reserved the right to 
revise their flexibilities and adjust them to the leve ls of commitment that othe rs were able to offer. 
1.111.  Cuba hoped that the process would continue in order to try and reach a successful 
outcome in the coming months and that it would be participatory, transparent and inclusive for 
everyone. Cuba reiterated its commitment to participating in the process in a constructive manner. 
1.112.  The representative of India said that as had been noted by the Director-General, an 
intensive process of engagement had begun in 2015 and India had engaged constructively in those 
discussions. Her delegation was committed to working with other Members to prepare a clearly 
defined post-Bali work program and to advance th e discussion on all Bali Ministerial and related 
subsequent Decisions. Members needed to collectiv ely seek the right level of ambition, starting 
with Agriculture. While doing so, it was imperative that they respected the existing mandate and 
progress already achieved in the negotiations, so far. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 14 - 
 
  1.113.  It should remain the Members' collective endeavour to seek equitable, balanced and 
development-oriented outcomes in all areas of their work through an inclusive and transparent 
negotiating process. They needed to remember that trade for development was the focus of the Round not trade for new market access as was continually emphasized by some. As such, the 
nature and purpose of the measures under negotiation should be factored into the outcome for it 
to be equitable. The global trading system cont inued to be highly inequitable. Trade did not 
automatically deliver development. Policy space remained critical for development and poverty 
alleviation. Trade rules that favoured only commercial interests and so constrained policy space 
could not deliver development. This was not the objective of this Round. As they talked of doability and recalibration, they could not forget that their attempt should be to try and level the playing field so that trade did in fact deliver developmen t. As Members continued to advance their work in 
the coming weeks and months, India assured the Director-General of its full cooperation and 
constructive engagement in all areas of the negotiations. 
1.114.  The representative of Japan agreed with the Director-General's assessment, especially the 
fact that progress had been slow which was quite disappointing. He was frustrated that, even at 
the meeting, some Members had just been repeating their basic positions. When Members would meet in Room W or in the informal setting, he hoped that they would get in "blood for blood" or 
"water for water" discussions. The request and offer approach could also be useful but this alone 
would not work. Instead, the approach should be coupled with a simplified formula for it to be a useful framework. 
1.115.  The representative of Paraguay said that Members were moving forward faster towards 
July 2015 in their discussions and were entering into substance as had been reported by the 
Director-General. But they still had no idea on how and what the results of this process would look like. The current exercise of review of the elemen ts of negotiation for Agriculture and the process 
of testing new ideas had been a positive exercise to be able to have a frank and open discussion. 
Although all of these were happening, the lack of a very clear idea of what they were seeking and 
to what extent they were ready to cont ribute to the process still remained.  
1.116.  Paraguay had great interest in maintaining the Doha Round objectives aimed at 
establishing a fair and market-oriented trading system through a programme of fundamental reforms. The reforms should cover strengthened ru les and specific commitments on the benefits of 
official aid and agricultural protection. The aim was to correct and prevent restrictions and 
distortions on the agricultural markets throughout the world and to substantially improve market 
access. The commitment and the reform were necessa ry and the result should correct and prevent 
restrictions and distortions. 
1.117.  Paraguay remained open to seek alternat ive ways but this should not move Members away 
from their commitments and objectives. They should not allow themselves to set up alternatives which would perpetuate the status quo. He stressed that the objective was to have significant 
economic results. They should really build possibilities to create employment, development and 
predictability for the well-being of the world population. The discussions in the area of official support were complicated. This support had made it difficult to effectively use market access commitments. The discussions in small formats should not have a perverse result that would 
pursue or maintain the current situation. 
1.118.  The level of tariffs in Agriculture presented too many differences. It would not be 
reasonable to forego the objectives of tariff reduction. Members' economies needed incentives to 
be able to continue growing. In this regard, international trade was an area that should be looked 
into. More specifically, the limits to distorting support such as the overall trade distorting support and the abandoning of policies of price support and the elimination of mechanisms which had an 
impact on predictability, and the reduction of tari ff escalation were elements which had to be born 
in mind and present in the results. On NAMA, he highlighted his country's interest in working in the inclusion of non-tariff measures. Paraguay also su pported the efforts made to progress in Services, 
TRIPS and Rules which he thought could also yield economic results in favour of development. 
1.119.  With MC10 in Nairobi and the celebration of  the twenty years of the organization at hand, 
Members had to find deliverables which would help them overcome the clear imbalances without calling for compensation. These included the elimination of all forms of export subsidies, the full 
liberalization of tropical products, the elimination of trade distortions in Cotton and all other 
elements which favoured greater participation of LDCs. He was also very happy to hear that the WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 15 - 
 
  Director-General was going to Paraguay the fo llowing week. This would be a very important 
opportunity to strengthen their dialogue domestically in support of all their work in Geneva. 
1.120.  The General Council took note of the Director-General's report and of the statements. 
2  IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALI OUTCOMES – STATEMENT BY THE CHAIRMAN 
2.1.  The Chairman3 recalled that Members had had this agenda item on implementation of the 
Bali outcomes since July 2014, to have an opportunity to assess the work taking place in those 
regular bodies which were directly working on the various Bali Decisions. 
2.2.  For this to be possible, throughout his tenure as Chair, he had kept a regular dialogue with 
Chairs of regular bodies, including those with dire ct Bali mandates, and with the Chairman of the 
TNC to systematically review their work in all areas and in particular the work taking place in direct follow-up to the mandates in the Bali Ministerial Decisions. 
2.3.  In December, he had provided a detailed overview of where things had been in all areas, 
both concerning the five Decisions on "regular work" and on the Bali Package. This had been circulated to delegations in JOB/GC/72. 
2.4.  Since December, the majority of regular bodies had not yet met – meetings were scheduled 
for them all, starting with the TRIPS Council th e following week, the Committee on Agriculture in 
early March, the Committee on Trade and Development in mid-March, the Committee on Rules of 
Origin in April, and so on. His statement at the meeting would therefore be brief, and focus mainly 
on the areas where relevant updates since December could be provided.  
2.5.  On the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce, a Dedicated Discussion chaired by 
Ambassador Suescum (Panama) had taken place on 16 February. At that meeting, DDG Yi had 
made a factual presentation on the Work Programme on Electronic Commerce focusing on its 
mandate as well as what had been discussed in the WTO since its adoption, complemented by a background information document prepared by the Secretariat under its own responsibility in 
JOB/GC/73. At that meeting, delegations had also exchanged views on the way forward. He 
recalled that, in line with the MC9 Decision, a review of progress on the work programme on e-commerce would take place at the July General Council meeting. As Friend of the Chair, 
Ambassador Suescum would continue his consultations and would report to the General Council in 
July. 
2.6.  On Aid for Trade, preparations for the Fifth Global Review were advancing according to plan. 
Members would recall that the Director-General had launched the joint monitoring and evaluation 
exercise with the OECD at their meeting in October 2014. He understood that over 230 responses 
had been received and that they were still coming  in. He would encourage delegations that had not 
responded to submit their completed questionnaires and case stories. The information collected 
would be profiled in both the Aid for Trade at  a Glance publication and the 2015 World Trade 
Report. With regard to the Review itself, the Director-General had outlined his plans at the 
Committee on Trade and Development's Thirty-Third Session on Aid for Trade held earlier that 
week. He invited delegations to consult the relevant information note, which provided them with 
an overview of both the event and the form to su bmit a request for a side event. A draft agenda 
would be put up on the WTO website in March and would be progressively updated thereafter. 
2.7.  Regarding the LDC Services Waiver, the Council for Trade in Services had convened a High-
level Meeting on the Operationalization of th e LDC Services Waiver on 5 February 2015. The 
purpose of the High-Level Meeting had been to allow " developed and developing Members, in a 
position to do so, [to] indicate sectors and modes of supply where they intend to provide 
preferential treatment to LDC services and services suppliers ." 
2.8.  During the High-Level Meeting, more th an twenty delegations had indicated specific 
preferences that they were intending to notify in due course, with several others reporting on their 
current state of consultations on the matter. The Chairperson of the Services Council, 
Ambassador CHOI Seokyoung (Republic of Korea), had noted the very high level of engagement 
                                               
3 The Chairman's statement was subsequently circulated in JOB/GC/75. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 16 - 
 
  and the positive spirit from the preference gran ting countries. The LDC coordinator had expressed 
the view that the process had been on the right track and that the indications made, if converted 
into notifications, would provide the WTO with a strong deliverable in response to the LDCs' 
collective request and a contribution to the DDA for the poorest Members. 
2.9.  With regard to next steps, the Services Council had agreed that delegations should 
endeavour to notify preferences at the earliest po ssible date, and no later than 31 July 2015. The 
Council had further agreed to engage in an assessment of the results of the High-Level Meeting at 
the next CTS on 18 March 2015.  
2.10.  As he had said earlier, meetings of the various other regular bodies in charge of 
implementing the Bali mandates were already scheduled. Concerning Trade Facilitation, the Preparatory Committee had continued to receive Category A notifications. Since the adoption of 
the Protocol, three Members had deposited their inst rument of acceptance following ratification of 
the Trade Facilitation Agreement at national level. 
2.11.  As this was his last meeting, he took the opportunity to sincerely thank all the Chairs of 
regular bodies, with whom he had enjoyed a very productive collaboration in 2014. Their work was 
fundamental to ensure that Members lived up to the commitments made. He could only encourage the outgoing as well as the incoming Chairs of regular bodies, together with all Members, to 
continue to give the highest priorities to the implementation mandates contained in all the Bali 
Decisions and Declarations. This was ever more important in 2015, as they prepared for the Ministerial Conference in December. 
2.12.  On the Ministerial Conference, he reminded all delegations that a trust fund had been 
created to facilitate the participation of least-developed countries to MC10. In line with the 
recommendation of the Budget Committee that Members had adopted at their meeting in December 2014, he would encourage once again all potential donors to indicate to the Secretariat 
the level of financial support they were prepared to provide. 
2.13.  The General Council took note of the Chairman's statement. 
3  PROTOCOL AMENDING THE TRIPS AGREEMEN T: UPDATE ON STATUS – STATEMENT BY 
THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL 
3.1.  The Chairman recalled that in December 2005, the General Council had unanimously adopted 
the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement. By doing this, all WTO Members had undertaken a 
political commitment to make an additional policy  option to access affordable medicines, often 
referred to as the Paragraph 6 System, a permanent part of the TRIPS Agreement. At the 
December 2014 General Council meeting, the Chairperson of the TRIPS Council, when reporting on the functioning of this System, reminded th ose WTO Members who had not yet accepted the 
Protocol of the need to proceed with domestic acceptance procedures in order to turn their political 
commitment into a legally binding commitment. He invited the Director-General to provide an update on the status of the Protocol. 
3.2.  The Director-General said that at the General Council meeting in December 2005, Members 
had agreed to amend the TRIPS Agreement to secure a permanent solution for the problem 
identified by Ministers in Paragraph 6 of the Do ha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public 
Health. The problem was the difficulties that WT O Members with insufficient or no manufacturing 
capacities in the pharmaceutical sector could face in making effective use of compulsory licensing 
under the TRIPS Agreement. Existing compulsory licenses under the TRIPS Agreement had been mostly to serve the domestic market of the co untry issuing them – they had not covered the 
possibility of producing exclusively for export to those countries reliant on imports of medicines. 
3.3.  Members had taken a decision to solve this problem by giving permanent legal effect, and 
not just a waiver, to a new kind of compulsory license – a special compulsory license for export. It 
had been ten years since that agreement had been reached. And Members were still to bring that 
agreement into force. He believed that it was high time to finalise this process. 
3.4.  The 2005 decision had been a clear recognition by all WTO Members of the importance of 
providing a permanent legal certainty to this ne w compulsory licensing system under the TRIPS WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 17 - 
 
  Agreement. Currently, access to medicines through compulsory licensing could take place on the 
basis of a waiver. Members had called for the le gal certainty of a permanent amendment to the 
TRIPS Agreement. Entry into force of the amendment would give this new compulsory licensing system the same status as all other public health related flexibilities under the TRIPS Agreement.  
3.5.  Furthermore, the legal certainty that this provided would strengthen the future potential to 
facilitate export of much-needed medicines. This  was particularly important in the event of a 
pandemic or when newer generations of medicines were protected by patents in traditional lower-
cost producing countries. The 2005 decision had been a great achievement for developing and 
least-developed countries. It had been designed to  give the most vulnerable a permanent pathway 
for access to affordable medicines.  
3.6.  Two-thirds of the Membership had to conf irm acceptance before the amendment came into 
force. Around half of the Members had already taken this step – including some LDCs. But they 
were not there yet – they needed 27 more acceptan ces. He had written to Ministers of all relevant 
countries who had not yet taken this step to urge them to formally accept the TRIPS amendment, 
and he hoped they would follow this up. Over recent days he had also taken this message to 
meetings of the African Group and the LDC Grou p, and a gathering of parliamentarians from 
around the world. Many Members had already sh own positive feedback. And some Members were 
asking for further guidance and assistance in carrying out necessary steps. 
3.7.  The Secretariat stood absolutely ready to provide all the necessary assistance that was 
requested or required by any Member. As a starter, they had prepared an aide mémoire  as a room 
document for this meeting. They could use that aide mémoire  to help in the domestic debates or in 
whichever way they thought was useful. Some delegations had asked whether they could make 
this aide mémoire  available as a formal WTO document and he did not have a problem with that. 
They thought that that might help their domestic procedures. If he heard no objections from 
anybody in the room, he would try to answer the request of those delegations and make the aide 
mémoire  available as a WTO document. That was what he would do unless somebody did not think 
that was appropriate. 
3.8.  He hoped that Members would make much more progress on this matter. They needed to 
complete this process and this was, as far as he saw it, to the benefit of the smallest and the most vulnerable. When Members fought to secure outc omes at the WTO, and many of them fought 
really hard to get this, it was essential that they followed it up by taking up the actions that 
confirmed what they had agreed. The TRIPS amen dment had been the first ever amendment to 
the entire package of WTO law – so he urged them to deliver on that commitment. 
3.9.  The representative of the Dominican Repub lic, on behalf of the IGDC, expressed the IGDC's 
full support for the efforts of the Director-General to increase the number of Members that had 
accepted this amendment so that it could enter in to force by the Tenth Ministerial Conference. This 
amendment allowed flexibilities that were of great assistance for developing countries in having 
access to affordable medicines. The IGDC also urged those countries that had not yet done so to 
accept this amendment which, as he was aware, concerned many developing countries. He hoped that they could all work together to make this important change to the TRIPS Agreement a reality. 
3.10.  The representative of Canada said that as one of the first WTO Members to implement the 
August 2003 waiver, Canada had been active in the amendment negotiations and strongly 
supported their successful conclusion. The 2003 waiv er and the subsequent decision to transform 
the waiver into a permanent amendment sent an important signal that trade and intellectual 
property rights supported developing countries' access to medicines. Canada also thanked the 
Secretariat for circulating the unofficial room document. He only had time to have a cursory look at it but it seemed like a very useful and clearly drafted document that laid out the benefits of 
entry into force of the Protocol amending the TR IPS Agreement. His delegation agreed with the 
Director-General's assessment that this aide mémoire  could be a great tool to assess those 
Members who had yet to accept the amendment to use in convincing their decision-makers of the 
advantages of codifying the Paragraph 6 System  in the TRIPS Agreement. Canada joined the 
Director-General in lending its support in this important initiative and it encouraged all WTO 
Members who had not yet accepted the Protocol to do so by MC10. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 18 - 
 
  3.11.  The representative of the United States strongly supported the 2005 decision to amend the 
TRIPS Agreement and had been the first Member to notify its acceptance of the amendment. The 
US respected the trading partner's right to protect public health and in particular to promote access to medicines for all and supported the vital role of the Patent System in promoting the 
development and creation of new and innovative life-saving medicines. The United States 
welcomed the Members that had accepted the amendments so far and in this regard, it would be interested in learning about the steps required for accepting the amendment in those Members 
that had not yet completed their process and their plans for moving forward. 
3.12.  The Chairman thanked the Director-General for the status update. The 2005 Decision to 
make this a permanent amendment had a deadline of up to the end of 2015 to reach the two-
thirds threshold. Legally, Members had to get this done before the end of the year to permit its 
entry into force. Members had an opportunity to se nd a very strong signal that they could make a 
legal pathway available to access affordable medicines and that this would be permanently available. He joined the Director-General in his call urging Members who had not yet accepted to 
do so and hopefully in time for MC10. 
3.13.  The General Council took note of the Director-General's statement and of the other 
statements and agreed to circulate the aide mémoire as a WTO document. 4 
4  WORK PROGRAMME ON SMALL ECONOMIES – REPORT BY THE CHAIRMAN OF THE 
DEDICATED SESSION OF THE COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT 
4.1.  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 reports regularly to the Council 
on the progress of work in its Dedicated Sessions on this subject. At Bali, Ministers also adopted a Decision re-confirming their commitment to the Work Programme and instructing the CTD to 
continue its work in Dedicated Sessions under th e overall responsibility of the General Council. 
4.2.  He had been informed that Ambassador Pierre Claver NDAYIRAGIJE (Burundi), Chairperson 
the CTD, was unfortunately not able to be with them that day. He would therefore read out his 
statement on his behalf, as followed: 
"Members may recall that in my last statement to the General Council in December, 
I reported that the proponents of Small Economies were following up on the Decision taken at the WTO's 9th Ministerial Conference in Bali. That decision instructs the WTO Secretariat 
to provide relevant information and factual analysis for discussion among Members 
concerning item "K" of the Small Economies' Work Programme and, in particular, the challenges and opportunities experienced by sm all economies when linking into global value 
chains in trade in goods and services. 
Members agreed late last year on an outline of issues for the Secretariat to research in 
regard to small economies and global value chains. It is my understanding that the 
Secretariat is currently carrying out this work with the hope that it will be finished in a few 
months' time." 
4.3.  The representative of Guatemala, on behalf  of the SVEs, expressed the SVEs' full support for 
the current study that the Secretariat was undertaking regarding the challenges and opportunities 
that the SVEs faced with respect to the global and regional value chains. The outcome of the study 
would be revealing on the specific situation of the SVEs and would enrich the discussions within the CTD Dedicated Session. The SVEs looked forward to the result of this research and to discuss 
and find solutions to the particular situation of small and vulnerable economies in the dedicated 
session. 
4.4.  The representative of the European Union fu lly agreed with the importance of global value 
chains for developing countries' integration in the world trading system. The EU welcomed the 
Secretariat's work along the lines that had been mentioned. The EU was funding an OECD study on 
"Developing Countries' Participation in Global Value Chains: Implications for Trade and Trade-
                                               
4 The aide mémoire was subsequently circulated in document WT/GC/W/696. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 19 - 
 
  Related Policies." This study would be published shortly. What the EU had seen from the OECD 
study was extremely promising. Given that the Secretariat's paper and the OECD study covered common ground, the EU believed that the authors of the OECD study should be invited to present it and discuss it within the CTD Dedicated Session. The Secretariat's paper should also reflect the 
findings of the OECD study as it would be published shortly. 
4.5.  The General Council took note of the report  of the Chairperson of the Dedicated Session of 
the Committee on Trade and Development and of the statements. 
5  REVIEW OF THE EXEMPTION PROVIDED UNDER PARAGRAPH 3 OF THE GATT 1994 
(WT/L/948) 
5.1.  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. On 20 December 1994, the United States had invoked the 
provisions of Paragraph 3(a) with respect to specific legislation that had met the requirements of 
that paragraph. Paragraph 3(b) of GATT 1994 called for a review of this 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 – in order to examin e whether the conditions which created the need 
for the exemption still prevailed. 
5.2.  The General Council last considered this matter at its meeting in November 2013 at which it 
took note that under the two-year cycle in Paragraph 3(b), the next review would be held in 2015. 
For the purposes of the conduct of the 2015 Review, he proposed that Members proceeded in a 
manner similar to that in 2013, which had been based on a procedure agreed by the General Council in December 2002. Therefore, all interested delegations could speak at that day's meeting 
with regard to the current review. In addition, interested delegations could submit comments and 
questions to the United States regarding the oper ation of the legislation under the exemption, to 
which the US would be invited to respond. Thos e statements, questions and responses, together 
with the annual statistical report provided by the US under Paragraph 3(c) of GATT 1994, would 
form the basis for the 2015 Review. 
5.3.  This matter would be on the Agenda of subsequent General Council meetings in the course of 
2015 as the Chair deemed appropriate, or at the request of any Member. The Council would 
consider this matter again at its last meeting this year, where it would take note of the discussions 
held in the course of the review until then, and take any other action it could agree on. It would also take note that the subsequent review would normally be held in 2017. As provided in 
Paragraph 3(e) of GATT 1994, the exemption was without prejudice to solutions concerning 
specific aspects of the legislation covered by this exemption negotiated in sectoral agreements or in other fora. He drew attention to the annual report circulated by the United States in document 
WT/L/948.  
5.4.  The representative of the European Union recalled that as he had already stated in 2013 and 
even before, the EU supported this review process. The EU thanked the US for its notification. He 
wished to underline again the EU's strong concerns with this unjustified exception. The EU 
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 serv ed a legitimate purpose in the current global 
economy. The prevailing situation had negative economic consequences for the EU's and other 
countries' ship-building industry but also for the US Maritime Industry which was faced with higher 
costs due to the closure of the US market for foreig n-built ships. In this regard, the EU wanted to 
exceptionally echo a 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 ." The EU sincerely hoped that the 2015 review was 
consequent. It should not become simply a recurring point in the agenda but rather a starting point to look into a situation that was neither justified nor satisfactory. 
5.5.  The representative of Japan said that normally, he did not repeat what he had stated before 
but he thought this agenda item was a bit different. Since this exemption was a deviation from the 
fundamental principle of the WTO, Japan atta ched great importance to the review. The WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 20 - 
 
  explanations given by the US in the past review s had fallen short of demonstrating the necessary 
explanation of the substantial need for such an exemption. Japan hoped that through this review, 
substantial consultations would be conducted so that Members were able to examine in detail whether the condition which had created the need for the exemption still prevailed. 
5.6.  The representative of Norway thanked the US  for the statistical documentation circulated in 
WT/L/948 dated 22 December 2014. This, as had been amply demonstrated also by his two 
colleagues, was an important issue as a waiver in essence made it impossible to sell ships to the 
United States. As regards the conduct of the review, Norway believed that it should focus on the 
salient points of Paragraph 3(b) which was the examination of whether the conditions which had created the need for the exemption still prevailed. It  was his delegation's view that they needed to 
move beyond the point of discussing only statis tical information submitted under Paragraph 3(c) 
and address also the conditions for exemptions. As far as the practical steps in this process were 
concerned, Norway was prepared to go along with the procedures suggested by the Chair. 
5.7.  The representative of the Republic of Korea thanked the United States for its notification in 
document WT/L/948. Korea had systemic and commercial concerns regarding the United States' 
exemption under Paragraph 3(a) of GATT 1994. Ko rea was of the view that the Jones Act was a 
piece of legislation that restricted fair competition in the ship-building and the shipping market and 
no longer served a legitimate purpose to this global economy. Therefore, Korea believed that the 
review of this long-standing exemption in accordance with Paragraph 3(b) of GATT 1994 should focus on examining whether the conditions which had created the need for such exemption still 
prevailed rather than purely a data-sharing process. Korea would like to ask the United States to 
provide persuasive explanation on the necessity to continue this exemption and was willing to 
participate in any further discussions under this agenda item. 
5.8.  The representative of China noted that it had been the ninth review of this long-standing 
exemption. As he had stated before, China attached great importance to this issue on which it had 
commercial and systemic concerns. His delegation appreciated the detailed information the United States had provided as required by Paragraph 3(c) of GATT 1994. However, the review should 
focus on the examination of whether the conditions which had created the need for the exemption 
still prevailed. China would like to join further discussions on this review. 
5.9.  The representative of Canada looked forwar d to participating in this review and thanked the 
United States for providing the information. Ca nada hoped that the US would take the steps 
necessary to eliminate the need for this waiver in  the near future. He could not agree more with 
the statement of Senator McCain mentioned earlier. 
5.10.  The representative of Australia thanked the United States for its statistical report. Australia 
had long-standing concerns about this exemption. His delegation looked forward to participating in 
the review and shared the view expressed by other Members about its scope. 
5.11.  The representative of Hong Kong, China noted that this was the ninth review of the Jones 
Act exemption. Her delegation had been disappointe d by the outcome of the previous reviews. Its 
objective and systematic interest, this time, remain ed unchanged. It was useful to recall that her 
delegation's concerns stemmed from its recognition of the exemption under Paragraph 3(a) of GATT 1994 that it was a major derogation from a fundamental principle of the WTO – National 
Treatment, and that the exemption had been in voked by one Member and had perpetrated for 
more than fifteen years after the establishment of the WTO. Further, as a proponent for the 
liberalisation of maritime transport which represented a major mode of transport for trade and a 
crucial part of the logistics supply chain, he r delegation was concerned that the exemption 
represented a major impediment to the Member concerned in making any market access commitments in the maritime transport services . She hoped the US would consider progressive 
market liberalisation on this important sector. This review provided a good opportunity for the US 
to seriously review whether the legislation covered by this exemption was still serving the objectives originally intended, and whether the conditions for the retention of the measures still prevailed. As in the past, Hong Kong, China stood ready to discuss with the US and other Members 
with an open mind and in a constructive manner. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 21 - 
 
  5.12.  The representative of Chinese Taipei shar ed, as a major supplier of the maritime services, 
the systemic concerns raised by previous speakers . Chinese Taipei would like to participate in any 
further consultations on this issue. 
5.13.  The representative of the United States we lcomed the opportunity to participate in a review 
of the exemption under Paragraph 3 of GATT 1994. The US had continued to provide WTO 
Members with annual statistical reports pursuant to the requirements of Paragraph 3(c) of GATT 1994 including the most recent report that was before Members that day. These reports provided 
detailed annual reporting of vessel orders and deliver ies from US shipyards. The US stood ready to 
answer Members' questions on this topic. As  the United States had explained before, the 
provisions of Paragraph 3 of the GATT 1994 formed  an integral part of the GATT 1994. Paragraph 
3 of 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 enforced 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 de creased. This provision had been agreed to by 
all Members and was a central part of the Uruguay Round results. With regard to the continuing 
need for this exemption, it was critical for US ship-builders to build commercial ships for this trade if a viable industrial base was to be maintained  to meet future navy requirements. Moreover, the 
navy relied upon shipyards that performed commerc ial work for the Jones Act traded for day to 
day maintenance of naval and surge fleet vessels such as the ready reserve fleet. It was his 
delegation's strongly held position that 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 the United 
States still existed. Since the United States had invoked this exemption in 1994, there had been no amendments or measures adopted by the United States that would alter the US position in 
conforming to coverage by the exemption. The US had much the same need as it had in 1994 to 
maintain its shipyard's readiness to build and maintain naval vessels. With regard to the question raised about how waivers and exemptions were considered under the Jones Act, the conditions for granting a waiver were governed by federal regulation. Information regarding the conditions for 
eligibility and the criteria for governing the granting  of a waiver could be provided with additional 
detail. He thanked his colleagues for their comments that day. The US had taken careful note of them and looked forward to participating in the pr ocess moving forward as suggested by the Chair. 
5.14.  The Chairman took this as agreement to  continue the process and that there would be 
genuine discussion, dialogue and exchange of information consistent with the process of past 
cycles. 
5.15.  The General Council took note of the statements and agreed to revert to this item at a 
future meeting. 
6  WAIVERS UNDER ARTICLE IX OF THE WTO AGREEMENT  6.1  Jordan – Request for a Waiver relating to  the Transitional Period for the Elimination 
of the Export Subsidy Programme for Jordan (G/C/W/705) – Statement by the 
Chairman of the Council for Trade in Goods 
6.1.  The Chairman said that this item related to a factual report on a request for a waiver by 
Jordan on the Transitional Period for the Elimination of its Export Subsidy Programme contained in 
document G/C/W/705. Article IX:3(b) of the Marrakesh Agreement stipulated that a request for a waiver should be considered by the relevant Co uncil during a time not exceeding 90 days, at the 
end of which the relevant Council should submit a report to the Ministerial Conference – therefore 
to the General Council. He understood that the Council for Trade in Goods considered this request at its meeting in November 2014 and invited Ambassador Atanas PAPARIZOV (Bulgaria), Chairperson of the Goods Council, to report on  the Council's consideration of this matter. 
6.2.  Ambassador Atanas PAPARIZOV (Bulgaria), Chairperson of the Goods Council, reported that 
at the CTG meeting on 17 November 2014, the delega tion of Jordan, pursuant to Article IX.3 of 
the Marrakesh Agreement, had introduced document G/C/W/705 requesting a waiver to extend WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 22 - 
 
  until 31 December 2023 Jordan's transitional peri od for the elimination of export subsidies, the 
phase-out of which, pursuant to a General Council decision in respect of the application of Article 27.4 of the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures, was to be completed by 31 December 2015. 
6.3.  At that meeting some delegations had expr essed their support for Jordan's request, while 
others had recognised the difficulties Jordan ha d been facing in a number of economic areas but 
had invited Jordan to explore other measures to support its economy rather than extending the 
phasing out of its export subsidy programme. 
6.4.  Therefore, the Council for Trade in Goods had not completed its consideration of the waiver 
request within the 90 days stipulated in Articl e IX.3(b), and requested that the General Council 
agreed to allow it to continue considering Jordan's waiver request and to report back to this 
Council once it had completed this work. 
6.5.  The Chairman thanked Ambassador Paparizov for his report and highlighted that – in light of 
his report and of the request by the Goods Council to continue to consider this request – a 
discussion on this matter was not expected in the General Council. Therefore, he would propose 
that the General Council agree to allow the Goods Co uncil to continue to consider Jordan's request 
and to report back to the General Council once it had completed this work. 
6.6.  The General Council so agreed. 
7  WTO YOUNG PROFESSIONALS PROGRAMME – STATEMENT BY THE DIRECTOR-
GENERAL 
7.1.  The Chairman said that the item was on th e agenda at the request of the Director-General 
and invited him to introduce this matter. 
7.2.  The Director-General said that concerns ha d often been raised that the make-up of the WTO 
Secretariat did not fully reflect the diversity of its Membership. There was a clear need to address 
this point while abiding by the existing rules and regulations. All WTO recruitment processes 
followed a very strict, formal and well-structured procedure, which was essentially based on merit. 
Bearing this formal, structured process in mind, as Director-General he had increasingly made the 
diversity of the Secretariat a personal priority. 
7.3.  One thing that he had observed was that there could be more candidates from developing 
and least-developed countries. If Members were to make further progress on the diversity issue then they needed to encourage such candidates to come forward, and they needed them to be 
competitive in the recruitment process. So he thou ght that this was an area where he could help. 
This was what the idea of a Young Professionals Programme in the WTO was all about. He had wanted to raise this that day so that all Members were aware. Deputy Director-General Yonov 
Frederick Agah had been leading this project and he wanted to thank him for the effort he had put 
into this work. 
7.4.  The proposal for a WTO Young Professionals Programme had already been presented to the 
CTD and the CBFA, and had been explained in informal consultations with various Group 
coordinators. These included the LDC Group, Af rica Group, ALBA Group, Arab Group, ASEAN, 
GRULAC, and the Pacific Island Forum Secretariat representative. 
7.5.  The objective of the Programme was to enhance the knowledge and skills of young 
professionals from eligible participating Members on WTO issues. As he had suggested, it would 
therefore help to widen the pool of candidates who could compete for recruitment in the WTO and other regional and international organisations. He did not intend to give Members a full outline of 
the Programme at the meeting, but the key points were as followed: it would be focused primarily 
on recruiting young professionals from developing  and least-developed country Members. The idea 
would be that, in the initial phase, priority would be given to countries without any representation 
in the Secretariat. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 23 - 
 
  7.6.  The selected young professionals would wo rk in the Secretariat for a maximum of twelve 
months. In the first year of the Programme only five Young Professionals would be recruited. The number could increase in subsequent years, depending on the funds they could generate. 
7.7.  There would be no extension of this one ye ar period, nor any guarantee of a job in the WTO. 
The hope was that at the end of the twelve-month  period, a participating young professional would 
have enough knowledge, skills and experience to work as a trade advisor to his or her government; to work in the field of international trade; or to meet the essential competencies that 
would allow the candidate to compete for vacancies at the WTO. 
7.8.  The initial response to this proposal ha d been very positive, though Members had raised 
questions on a number of points of detail – pa rticularly regarding how the scheme would be 
funded. In response to Members' requests, a pape r would be shortly issued setting out the details 
of the Programme. Members' comments and any further queries would be welcomed. There would 
also be opportunities for further discussion of this Programme through the biennial Technical Assistance plan in due course.  
7.9.  On that basis he invited Members to refrai n from commenting on this item that day. Once 
they had had the chance to review the details of the Programme, he hoped they would feel able to 
give it their full support. In his view it was an important element of their wider efforts to increase 
diversity and broaden the representation of the Membership within the Secretariat. 
7.10.  The General Council took note of the Director-General's statement. 
8  IMPROVING THE GUIDELINES FO R GRANTING INTERGOVERNMENTAL 
ORGANIZATIONS PERMANENT OBSERVER STAT US IN THE WTO – STATEMENT BY THE 
CHAIRMAN 
8.1.  The Chairman recalled that at the November 2011 meeting, the General Council had agreed 
to initiate a process of consultations to consider the issue of Observer Status for IGOs in the WTO, 
further to a communication by the Arab Group entitled "Improving the Guidelines for Granting 
Observer Status to Intergovernmental Organizations in the WTO" which had then been supplemented by a further communication in Ap ril 2012. In July 2014, the Arab Group – in a 
communication contained in WT/GC/159 – had requested to re-circulate their original proposal on 
improving the Guidelines for Granting IGOs Permanent Observer Status in the WTO, contained in document WT/GC/W/643. 
8.2.  His predecessors in this position conducted consultations on this matter, and throughout 
2014 he had continued those consultations in different configurations. As Members would recall, he 
had reported on those consultations to each regular General Council meeting in his tenure. 
8.3.  At the December meeting, in reporting on his consultations, he had noted that he had not 
viewed anybody's position as having become more entrenched. In fact, in his consultations, 
interested delegations had brought a constructive spirit at least to bear and part of the task had been to clear the air and to have more information of a factual nature before Members so that they 
had fully understood motivations for positions being taken and that exchange of information had 
continued. 
8.4.  As this was his last meeting as Chairman of the General Council, he would only urge 
continued engagement from all sides to address this issue, in a constructive manner and with a 
solution-finding spirit – and particularly looking ahead at MC10. Participation of IGOs in the work 
of the WTO, including at Ministerial Conferences, was of crucial importance – he believed all delegations agreed with that. For his part, he would brief his successor so that he could consider 
how to address this matter. 
8.5.  The representative of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, on behalf of the Arab Group, thanked the 
C h a i r m a n  f o r  h i s  c o n s u l t a t i o n  w i t h  M e m b e r s  o n  t h e  O b s e r v e r  S t a t u s  o f  I G O s  i n  t h e  W T O .  A s  
Members were all aware, the issue of granting obse rver status to IGOs in the WTO was not specific 
to any particular organization but a larger systemic one. A number of IGOs had been facing difficulty in having their request for observer stat us properly considered by the WTO. It would be 
crucial for Members to evaluate and devise the rules governing the process of granting IGOs WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 24 - 
 
  observer status in the WTO. The Arab Group believed that there was a real need to ensure that 
any request by an IGO to gain a permanent and/or  ad hoc observer status in the WTO should be 
based on the technical merits of such request. Objective and technical criteria had to be in place to ensure the proper application of the guidelines applicable to IGO participation and representation 
in the WTO. Falling short of attaining this requirement would risk jeopardising the credibility of the 
WTO as a rules-based organization. Therefore, it was important for the WTO to revisit its cooperation with IGOs and on the conditions associated to the WTO mandate and activity. Those 
conditions should be clear and objective. The process of granting observership should be neutral 
and transparent for all IGOs. The Arab Group wished to reaffirm its view that the responsibility of 
improving the guidelines had fallen equally on each Member and was in no way specific to a certain group. The Arab Group looked forward to positive engagement from the whole Membership 
to resolve this issue.  
8.6.  The representative of the Russian Federation continued to closely monitor the progress of the 
consultations on improving the guidelines for gr anting IGOs permanent observer status in the 
WTO. Russia believed that transparency and equal access for all were key principles of the WTO. 
Those principles should be ensured and put into  practice. Russia had a particular interest in 
resolving the issue in the shortest period of ti me in a way that would reflect the necessity to 
preserve transparency in the Multilateral Tradin g System. Russia joined the WTO as a member of 
an IGO – the Eurasian Customs Union which currently consisted of Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan and Armenia. At present, Russia expected to see the Eurasian Economic Commission as an observer in the WTO. He renewed Russia's call to all parties concerned to show flexibility and to 
find a solution to this issue. 
8.7.  The General Council took note of the Ch airman's statement and of the other statements. 
9  COMMITTEE ON BUDGET, FINANCE AND AD MINISTRATION - REPORT ON MEETINGS 
OF FEBRUARY 2015 (WT/BFA/147) 
9.1.  The Chairman drew the Council's attention to the report of the Budget Committee in 
document WT/BFA/147 and invited Ambassador Franci sco LIMA (El Salvador), Chairperson of the 
Committee on Budget, Finance and Administration, to introduce it. 
9.2.  Ambassador Francisco LIMA (El Salvador), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, Finance 
and Administration, said that in its meeting in February, the Committee on Budget, Finance and 
Administration had reviewed the Members' overall situation on Outstanding Contributions. The 
number of Members subjected to Administrative Measures and the total amount of outstanding 
contributions had continued to go down in 2014. He would read at the end of the meeting the 
updated list of the Members and Observers curre ntly under Administrative Measures. In the 
meantime, the Committee recommended to the Gene ral Council to urge Members and Observers 
under Administrative Measures to liquidate their arrears. 
9.3.  The Committee had reviewed the report of  the Working Group on Financial Regulations 
containing the changes to align them with the new requirements imposed by the implementation 
of the IPSAS. During both meetings held in February, delegations had provided comments on the report, which had been incorporated into the fi nal document. In conclusion, the Committee had 
endorsed the proposed revision of the WTO Financ ial Regulations annexed to the report presented 
that day in WT/BFA/147. Once the revised WTO Financial Regulations were approved by the 
General Council, the official revised WTO Financial Regulations document would bear the symbol WT/L/156/Rev.3. The Committee recommended that the General Council approved the revised 
WTO Financial Regulations as had been annexed to the report. 
9.4.  The Committee had been updated on the pr ogress made within the Working Group on After 
Service Health Insurance (ASHI). The Working Group had considered several scenarios for future 
budgetary and financial implications of the WTO' s Medical Insurance Plan. The Working Group had 
agreed on a provisional programme of meetings up to July 2015. The Chair of the Working Group 
remained confident that the Working Group would deliver on its mandate by the deadline. 
9.5.  The Committee had also been informed ab out the progress made on the Organizational 
review initiated by the Director-General at th e end of 2013. Members had expressed their support WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 25 - 
 
  to the Director-General on the outcome of the divisional staffing structure. The Committee had 
wished to be kept informed on further developmen t related to the Organizational review process. 
9.6.  The Committee had continued its work on the establishment of an Audit Committee at the 
WTO. A document containing the Terms of Reference for a Working Group had been presented to 
the Committee. He had invited delegations to submit to the Secretariat any suggestion that they 
wished to add to the draft Terms of References in  order to prepare the revised document on Terms 
of References which would be discussed at the next CBFA meeting. 
9.7.  The Committee had also been updated on the administrative progress report related to extra-
budgetary funds. The Committee had been informed about the possibility of the Director-General 
seeking to reallocate savings from the regular budget to technical assistance to launch a new programme in 2015 called Young Professionals Programme (YPP). 
9.8.  The Committee had been reminded that a fund to support LDCs to participate in MC10 had 
been established. As no funds had been received so far, Members had been encouraged to make contributions as soon as possible. 
9.9.  Finally, due to the recent currency fluctu ations, a document had been presented to the 
Committee exposing the recent situation on fluctuations and the potential impact on the financial management of the WTO. The Committee had expressed an interest to continue monitoring the 
situation. 
9.10.  The General Council took note of th e statement of the Chairperson of the Budget 
Committee, approved the Budget Committee's specific recommendation in paragraphs 1.4 and 2.4 
of the report and adopted the report in WT/BFA/147. 
10  APPOINTMENT OF OFFI CERS TO WTO BODIES 
10.1.  The Chairman recalled that in accordance wi th the Guidelines for Appointment of Officers to 
WTO Bodies approved by the General Council in December 2002 (WT/L/510), he, together with 
Ambassador Fernando DE MATEO (Mexico), the Chairperson of the Dispute Settlement Body, had 
conducted consultations with delegations on a slat e of names for the appointment of Chairpersons 
to WTO regular bodies listed in Groups 1, 2, 4 an d 5 in the Annex to the Guidelines. He noted that 
their consultations had also included the Preparatory Committee on Trade Facilitation, as a body 
under the General Council that had been established by the Ninth Ministerial Conference. 
10.2.  In undertaking the process set out in the Guidelines, they had put into effect the practical 
steps to improve their implementation agreed by the General Council in July 2012, and contained 
in JOB/GC/22. 
10.3.  He thanked Ambassador de Mateo for his as sistance, which had been very valuable to him 
and, he was certain, also to delegations. In line  with the practical steps, they had started their 
consultations by meeting first with Group Coordi nators. Subsequently, and in accordance with 
Paragraph 7(d) of the Guidelines, they had provided a specified time-period in which they would be available to hear the views and suggestions of  interested delegations. Those consultations had 
taken place over some four weeks, in order to provide a full opportunity for all interested 
delegations to meet with them. They had consulted all delegations that had come forward and requested a meeting, and had regularly kept Gr oup Coordinators informed of progress. This 
process included an informal Heads of Delegation meeting which had been held on 19 February. 
10.4.  He expressed the sincere appreciation of Ambassador de Mateo and himself for the excellent 
cooperation they had received from the Group Coor dinators during this process. In addition, he 
also thanked all the delegations they had consulted for their cooperative and constructive spirit in 
this exercise. 
10.5.  He was pleased to inform delegations that, on the basis of those consultations, there was a 
consensus on the following slate of names: WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 26 - 
 
  General Council 
 H.E. Mr. Fernando DE MATEO ( Mexico ) 
Dispute Settlement Body H.E. Mr. Harald NEPLE ( Norway ) 
 
Trade Policy Review Body 
 H.E. Mr. Atanas Atanassov PAPARIZOV ( Bulgaria ) 
Council for Trade in Goods 
 H.E. Mr. Héctor CASANUEVA ( Chile ) 
Council for Trade in Services 
 H.E. Mr. Martin EYJÓLFSSON ( Iceland ) 
Council for TRIPS 
 
 H.E. Mr. Abdolazeez AL-OTAIBI ( Kingdom of Saudi 
Arabia ) 
Committee on Trade and 
  Development  H.E Mr. Bassirou SENE ( Senegal ) 
Committee on Balance-of- 
  Payments Restrictions  H.E. Mr. Bertrand de CROMBRUGGHE de 
PICQUENDAELE ( Belgium ) 
Committee on Budget, Finance  
  and  Administration  H.E. Mr. Daniel BLOCKERT ( Sweden ) 
Committee on Trade and  
  Environment  Ms. Irene B.K. YOUNG ( Hong Kong, China ) 
Committee on Regional Trade  
  Agreements  H.E. Mr. Francisco PIREZ ( Uruguay ) 
Working Group on Trade, Debt and  
  Finance  H.E. Mr. Xavier CARIM ( South Africa ) 
Working Group on Trade and  
  Transfer of Technology 
 H.E. Mr. Luc-Joseph OKIO ( Republic of  Congo ) 
 
10.6.  With the exception of the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements, appointments for 
those bodies would be for one year as usual, in keeping with the general rule in the Guidelines. 
The appointments would be made formally by the WTO bodies concerned at their subsequent 
meetings in 2015. 
10.7.  With respect to the Committee on Regional Trade Agreements, he informed Members that 
the candidate around whom consensus had been built during the consultations, now found his 
country to be in arrears. This had arisen very la te in the process. The approach was therefore to 
ask the current Chairperson, in this case Ambassador Francisco Pirez (Uruguay), to continue in his 
role temporarily, pending details regardin g arrears and succession being worked out. 
10.8.  In relation to the Preparatory Committee on Trade Facilitation, the consultations had 
confirmed the consensus supporting having its current Chairperson, Ambassador Esteban Conejos, (Philippines), continue to Chair the PCTF. 
10.9.  As Members had heard from the slate of names for the regular bodies he had just read out, 
consensus had been reached on the appointment of the current Chairperson of the Committee on 
Trade and Development in Special Session, Ambassador Neple (Norway), as the new Chairperson 
of the DSB. Therefore, Ambassador de Mateo and he had also consulted group coordinators and WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 27 - 
 
  interested delegations on his successor as the new Chairperson of the CTD in Special Session. As a 
result, he was pleased to inform delegations that  there was consensus on the appointment of H.E. 
Ms TAN Yee Woan (Singapore) as the new Chairperson of the CTD-SS. This appointment would also be made formally by th e CTD-SS at its next meeting. 
10.10.  Finally, delegations were aware that Ambassador Ronald Saborio (Costa Rica), Chairperson 
of the DSB in Special Session, had relinquished his Ambassadorial post at the end of the previous month. In letters that he had received from the Government of Costa Rica and that he had shared 
with Group Coordinators, he had been informed that Ambassador Saborio would continue in an 
advisory role with his Government, and that, with the full support of his Government, he had generously offered to continue to se rve as Chairperson of the DSB-SS.  
10.11.  First and foremost, he took the opportunity to thank Ambassador Saborio most sincerely, 
on behalf of the General Council, for his outstanding contribution to the organization and the 
Multilateral Trading System over many years of se rvice. His positive engagement and constructive 
spirit was highly appreciated by all. 
10.12.  He also thanked him for his work as Chairperson of the DSB-SS and for his dedication to 
the negotiations. In the light of the communications from the Government of Costa Rica that he had just mentioned, he had consulted delegations on Costa Rica's offer, and he was pleased to 
inform delegations that there was consensus on Ambassador Saborio to continue to serve as 
Chairperson of the DSB-SS until the next Minister ial Conference, on the clear understanding that 
he retained his affiliation with government, and would not engage in any outside activity that would present any real or perceived conflict of interest. 
10.13.  He stressed that, in line with the Guidelin es for the Appointment of Officers to WTO bodies, 
representatives from each and every WTO Member had the right to chair any WTO body, at any level. The Guidelines pointed out that the choice of a chairperson should primarily reflect the 
capacity and the availability of that person to undertake the special responsibilities required. The 
Guidelines also provided that appointments should be acceptable to the Membership as a whole and not only to regions or groupings that might have proposed them. The appointment of 
Chairpersons was the result of a process of consultations, which was aimed at building consensus. 
And he was grateful for the fact that individual  delegations, and group coordinators, had fully 
respected those Guidelines to bring forward their views. 
10.14.  He also noted that, during the process of consultations, a number of delegations had 
pointed out to him that the process was, in their vi ew, imperfect, and that such factors as rotation, 
and regional and group representation could usefully be reviewed. Other delegations had 
expressed satisfaction with the current process and had stressed that some elements, such as 
trust in the selection committee, confidentiality and flexibility, were essential and needed to be 
preserved. As a participant in this year's consultations, the incoming Chair would consult with Members whether a further review should be underta ken, and if so, when and with what scope. It 
was always open to the Membership, and to the initiative of interested Members, to find the most 
appropriate ways to further refine the process. 
10.15.  The representative of Chinese Taipei expr essed her great appreciation of the efforts and 
hard work that the General Council Chairperson,  the DSB Chairperson, and the regional group 
coordinators had put into the consultation process for the appointment of officers to the WTO's 
principal bodies. She also had great respect for all the colleagues who had put their names forward as candidates for the Chairpersons of various bodies, which demonstrated their strong motivation 
and enthusiasm for serving the WTO. 
10.16.  The Guidelines for the Selection of Chairpersons to WTO Bodies were clearly set out in 
document WT/L/510 and in the Practical Steps to Improve the Implementation of the Guidelines, 
which were contained in document JOB/GC/22 of 2012. These Guidelines should be respected. 
10.17.  However, she regretted to point out that there was one full and equal Member who had 
never been granted the opportunity of chairing any principal body of the WTO in the fourteen 
years since it had acceded to this organization. This year, and for the second year in a row, this 
Member had put its candidate forward for the Ch airpersonship of one of the WTO's principal 
bodies. Members knew for a fact that there had been no other candidate for that particular body. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 28 - 
 
  Yet, this Member had been told, once again, that  it would not be provided the Chairpersonship for 
any of the principal bodies, with no justifiable reason given for such a decision. She was sure colleagues and fellow-Members could imagine this Member's total dismay and disappointment at being informed of this decision once again, and could understand its feelings towards the selection 
process. 
10.18.  If a full and equal Member that had for many  years played an active and constructive role 
in the WTO family was treated in such a way, this surely constituted a serious form of 
discrimination. If this had to continue, it would mean that some WTO Members, out of a total of 
160, could be denied their legitimate right to serv e the organization by chairing one of the WTO's 
principal bodies. This unfair treatment of a Member , or Members, went directly against one of the 
fundamental principles of the WTO, and indeed the basic spirit of this organization. It undermined 
confidence in the efficacy of th e election process, and could caus e systemic damage to the whole 
WTO operation. 
10.19.  She had mentioned the same serious concerns at the General Council Meeting in March 
2014. She reiterated her delegation's call to Member s to ensure that its rights to fair and equal 
treatment were fully respected and observed at all times, in accordance with the agreed guidelines for the process of selecting officers for the WTO bodies. 
10.20.  The representative of Lesotho, on behalf of the African Group, took note and welcomed the 
outcome of the consultations. As Members were aw are, the African Group had participated in the 
process. The African Group expressed its deepes t sense of displeasure with the outcome of 
consultations which with each passing year resembled the waning level of transparency, integrity 
and credibility that should have otherwise characterised those consultations. In particular, the 
African Group was deeply displeased with the outcome of the consultations primarily because none of the Group's interests had been taken on boar d. As a matter of fact, the Group had been the 
most marginalised entity in the whole process. 
10.21.  Taking a look at the current slate presented to Members, it was in no way different from 
the previous outcomes dating as far back as 2004. In this context, the histogram on the slate of 
Members that had so far chaired the WTO bodies provided some key facts that should inspire 
Members to embark on a serious review process of the current practice in consultations. Both the new slate that had just been adopted and the histog ram testified to the fact that there was a deep 
seated problem in the current practice in consultati ons. On this basis, the African Group brought to 
the attention of Members some facts. 
10.22.  Firstly, it could be drawn that despite co nstituting about one-third of the WTO Membership, 
Africa's service to the WTO bodies under the Gene ral Council had been limited to an average of 
about two committees in a given year. Secondly, one telling revelation by the histogram was the 
fact that the chairpersonship of some committees, particularly CTD and CBFA, almost followed a default setting of being exclusive to some few select regions. This trend brought into disrepute the 
principle of geographical rotation. Thirdly, there was a clear case of limited representation of the 
African countries in respect of chairing the WTO Councils. This was quite concerning because it suggested that the bodies that were at the highest level of the hierarchical structure of the General 
Council bodies were reserved only for few regions.  Fourthly, on the representation of the African 
Group in the bodies under the TNC, the histogram revealed that only three African 
Ambassadors/delegates had served in those bodies to a maximum period of about two terms. Behind each and every one of those facts he had shared with Members lied an even more telling 
story which might not be appropriate to raise in that forum. 
10.23.  Those were immediate concerns which were symptomatic of the underlying maladies that 
should be addressed in earnest. To this end, the Chairman's comments on the need for further 
work in this area were welcome. It was the hope of the African Group that his successor would 
prioritise this issue with a view to restoring faith, transparency, integrity and credibility to the consultation process. This would help Members avoid outcomes that resulted from arbitrary and discretionary determinations. 
10.24.  He underscored that the sentiments he had just shared with Members were in no way 
directed to the person of the Chairman and th e person of the DSB Chair. They were purely 
directed at the ailments that the consultation system currently harboured. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 29 - 
 
  10.25.  The Chairman invited the General Council to  agree by consensus on the slate of names for 
the appointment of officers in all the WTO bodies and to take note of his statement and of the two 
other statements. 
10.26.  The General Council so agreed and took note of the statements. 
10.27.  The Chairman recalled that – in keeping with Paragraph 7.3 of the Guidelines for 
Appointment of Officers to WTO Bodies – the outgoing Chairpersons of the Council for Trade in 
Goods and the Council for Trade in Services were to conduct consultations to select Chairpersons 
for the bodies established under their respective Councils. The Guidelines also provided that those 
Chairpersons should announce the start of their respective consultation processes at the February General Council meeting. He invited Ambassador At anas PAPARIZOV (Bulgaria), Chairperson of the 
Goods Council and Ambassador CHOI Seokyoung (Rep ublic of Korea), Chairperson of the Services 
Council, to make their respective statements. 
10.28.  Ambassador Atanas PAPARIZOV (Bulgaria), Chairperson of the Goods Council, informed 
Members that, in accordance with the Guidelines  for Appointment of Officers to WTO Bodies 
approved by the General Council in December 2002 (WT/L/510), he would be starting 
consultations for the appointment of chairpersons of the subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods. He would be carrying out this proce ss with a view to proposing and agreeing on a 
balanced slate of names at the next meeting of the Council for Trade in Goods, scheduled for 
Thursday, 26 March 2015. He intended to make sufficient time available to meet with any interested Members and to hear their views and suggestions, and would be sending a fax to all Heads of Delegations that day indicating his availability during the coming week. He would start 
this process with group coordinators, as suggest ed in document JOB/GC/22. Following this, he 
would conduct further consultations as necessary. In order to ensure the efficiency of the process and the balance mentioned in the Guidelines, he would work in coordination with the Chairperson 
of the Services Council. He also thanked the Ch airman and through him all the Members of the 
WTO for the confidence they had given him as the future Chairperson of the Trade Policy Review Body. He would do his best to work at the level ne cessary for the position as had been done by its 
outgoing Chairperson and would promote efficiency in the agenda of the WTO. 
10.29.  Ambassador CHOI Seokyoung (Republic of Korea), Chairperson of the Services Council, 
recalled that in accordance with the Guidelines for the Appointment of Officers to WTO Bodies, 
adopted by the General Council in December 2002 (WT/L/510), he would be starting his 
consultations for the appointment of Chairpersons to  the subsidiary bodies of the Council for Trade 
in Services. He would be consulting with a view to arriving at a proposed slate of names of Chairpersons for 2015 that enjoyed the wide support  of the Membership. In order to ensure the 
balance of the slate, as mentioned in the Guidelines, he would be consulting with the Chairperson 
of the Goods Council, and would make sufficient time available to meet with any interested Members. He also thanked the Chairman of the General Council for his dedication and leadership, 
and all Members and the Secretariat for the suppor t and cooperation they had extended to him. 
10.30.  The General Council took note of the statements. 
11  MERCI GENÈVE – OPEN DAY – STATEMENT BY THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL 11.1.  The Chairman, under "Other Business", in vited the Director-General, to provide some 
information on the plans for an Open-Day titled " Merci Genève ". 
11.2.  The Director-General said that to mark the WTO's Twentieth Anniversary, an open day was 
planned to be held on 14 June. This had been do ne on numerous occasions in the past, but this 
time the aim was to say " thank you " to the local community in Geneva for hosting the WTO so 
gracefully for the past twenty years.  The day would therefore be called: " Merci Genève! " The doors 
of the WTO would be open to welcome visitors. And, as with previous events, Members were 
invited to come and to participate. He encouraged them to get involved – to set up stands in the 
international buffet for example, and to take the chance to interact closely with the local community. It was an opportunity to give their personal " merci ". The Information and External 
Relations Division would be organizing an information session in due course to provide them with 
further details. He hoped they would join in the spir it of the day and help say a loud "thank you" to 
the people of Geneva. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 30 - 
 
  11.3.  The General Council took note of the statement. 
12  ADMINISTRATIVE MEASURES FOR MEMBERS IN ARREARS – STATEMENT BY THE 
CHAIRMAN 
12.1.  The Chairman, speaking under "Other Business", recalled that the new revised 
Administrative Measures for Members in arrears, contained in WT/BFA/132, Annex I, had entered 
into force on 1 January 2013. 
12.2.  Those measures included a requirement th at, 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 Ob servers were under Administrative Measures. He 
invited the Chairperson of the Budget Committee, Ambassador Francisco LIMA (El Salvador), to 
provide the Council with the information. 
12.3.  Ambassador Francisco LIMA (El Salvador ), Chairperson of the Committee on Budget, 
Finance and Administration, recalled that the General Council approved three years ago changes in 
the procedures for Members and Observers subject to Administrative Measures. Those changes 
had become effective as of early 2013. He should list all Members and Observers under all 
c a t e g o r i e s  o f  A d m i n i s t r a t i v e  M e a s u r e s  a s  o f  1 9  F e b r u a r y  2 0 1 5 .  B e f o r e  h e  r e a d  t h e  l i s t ,  h e  reminded Members and Observers that they had received their assessment letters for the 2015 
contributions to the WTO budget mid-December 2014. As at the start of every year, a number of 
Members and Observers became subject to Administrative Measures and some changed categories. The Director-General had also notified  them by letter a couple of days ago. Since 10 
February, the Secretariat had received payments from three Members: Niger and Togo, previously 
in Category III. They had been taken off the list of Administrative Measures. The former Yugoslav 
Republic of Macedonia had been moved from Category III to Category I.  
12.4.  There were currently 19 Members and 6 Observers in Category I: Argentina; Benin; Cabo 
Verde; Democratic Republic of the Congo; Do minican Republic; Gabon; Kuwait, the State of; 
Lesotho; Malawi; Mongolia; Nigeria; Paraguay; Rwanda; St Vincent and Grenadines; Suriname; Tanzania; The former Yugoslav Republic of Macedo nia; Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of; Zambia; 
Equatorial Guinea (Observer); Iran (Observer); Lebanese Republic (Observer); Libya (Observer); 
Sudan (Observer); and Syrian Arab Republic (Observer). There were 2 Members and no observer in Category II: Cameroon and Vanuatu. There were 8 Members and 1 Observer in Category III: Antigua and Barbuda; Central African Republic; Djibouti; Dominica; The Gambia; Grenada; 
Guinea-Bissau; Mauritania; and, Sao Tomé and Principe (Observer). 
12.5.  The Chairman said that 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 could be expected. 
12.6.  The General Council took note of the statements of the Chairperson of the Budget 
Committee and of the Chairman. 
13  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON 
13.1.  The Chairman5 said that it had become tradition for the outgoing Chairperson to offer his 
reflections on his or her tenure. It would not surprise most Members that he would indeed take an 
opportunity to speak and share his thoughts before handing over the gavel.  
13.2.  He did so with some humility – if Members had paused in the Atrium to look at the 
remarkable list of successive General Council Chairpersons, they would appreciate that each Chairperson built on the work of their predeces sors, and as a shared custodian of this body, 
carried the trust of the Membership forward to their successors. He began, therefore, with his 
gratitude to his immediate predecessors, Mr Fred Agah, Ms Elin Johansen and Mr Shahid Bashir, whose able stewardship had provided strong guidance. And looking further back, having had the 
privilege of working under the likes of Mr John We ekes, one was reminded of just how much they 
stood on the shoulders of those who had helped to create this institution. Most importantly, 
                                               
5 The Chairman's statement was circulated as JOB/GC/76. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 31 - 
 
  Chairpersons were able to perform their work in large measure because of the remarkable talent, 
dedication and wisdom of Mr Victor do Prado, Ms  Stefania Bernabe and the entire Council and TNC 
Division. 
13.3.  Turning to the present, the twelve-month  period ending that day had been, in a word, 
tumultuous. Ministers had given Members the mandate to implement their Bali Decisions and to 
develop a work program. And he had committed to them to ensure that implementation remained 
"Job No. 1". Alongside, Members' collective over sight of the TNC process had kept them focused 
on the work of the Director-General and the TNC on developing the work program. They had done 
their very best at the end of July to keep discussions moving. And he had offered all the tools at the disposal of the TNC Chair, for example by susp ending rather than adjourning their sessions, to 
keep hope alive. Finally, at the end of November they had been able to adopt a formal decision to 
get work going again, with a new July deadline. 
13.4.  With this re-engagement, Members had been able to look ahead. For the first time, two 
candidates had offered to host the next Ministerial Conference. His consultations had been 
extensive, and he was gratified that so many Members had participated to ultimately reach a 
consensus to hold the first-ever WTO Ministerial meeting in sub-Saharan Africa. He wished to take this opportunity to pay particular tribute to Ambassador John Kakonge (Kenya) for his 
engagement, the constructive role that he had played throughout the consultation process and his 
excellent co-operation throughout his tenure. He understood that he was relinquishing his post, and he knew he spoke for all Members in wishing Ambassador Kakonge well in his future endeavours. 
13.5.  As reflected on those files, he had been lucky to enjoy the utmost support and cooperation 
of the Director-General throughout his term. By making the decision on the work plan, and on MC10, Members had effectively said that, whatever the differences in national interests and 
positions, it was then more than ever clear that  they all shared the need for a truly Multilateral 
Trading System.  
13.6.  "Job No. 2" had been, and should be, for the General Council, as the body given all the 
authority vested in Ministers to act on their beha lf between Ministerial Conferences, to remain a 
body that brought longer term vision, a strate gic focus, and broader context to bear on the 
ongoing work of the organization. He did not beli ttle this ongoing work – whether the review of 
budgets, approval of waivers, or reports of co uncils or committees were put forward, the WTO was 
effective as an institution if Members efficiently ca rried out those tasks. So throughout the year, he 
had maintained a dialogue with all the Chairpersons of regular bodies and of course with the TNC Chairman, to ensure that they had kept a commo n, institution-wide view of their strategic 
direction and, in particular, to ensure that the implementation of the various Bali mandates in 
regular bodies had been given the highest priori ty. He thanked all the Chairpersons for their 
collaboration and for their support. 
13.7.  But in the General Council itself, the accumulated wisdom and insight of Ambassadors and 
Permanent Representatives was, frankly, wasted if Members simply read or repeated statements that were given to them; if they failed to engage with each other; and most importantly, if they 
did not consistently reminded themselves that all Members of the WTO shared a commitment to 
ensuring that trade made an ever better contribution to jobs, growth, and ultimately to sustainable 
development. 
13.8.  So he apologised for any impatience he might have shown, for repeating the same 
message, and for encouraging Members to share more fully their collective ownership of the 
"Member-driven" institution. At a minimum, they could not afford to claim that they were not allowed to talk about issues beyond Doha in a non-negotiating context at this Council. And it might 
be too easy to say "Leave it to the Chair", or "Leave it to the DG". More broadly, it was, of course, 
open to each of them to take the initiative, to take on more systemic and institutional issues, to caucus informally or to constitute a working group or group of friends, and to bring fresh and even "out-of-the-box" ideas to the Council as consensus built. It also should be the rule, not the 
exception, that they invited outside views to the Council – whether from other international 
organizations, from the private sector, from parliamentarians, and from the academic and public policy communities. They could not afford to be insulated from the outside world, or from the 
facts. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 32 - 
 
  13.9.  It had been in this spirit that during his term, he had sought to have them all mainstream 
trade and development. Members had learned in national capitals and in various internal forums that achieving development that was durable, that was sustainable economically, politically and socially, demanded that they supported good economic governance to create an enabling 
environment at home together with giving all countries a meaningful opportunity to increase their 
participation in the global economy through trade. In 2015, as the Director-General had reported at a previous General Council meeting, they had a unique opportunity to promote this coherence 
through Financing for Development at Addis Ababa, the Sustainable Development Goals Summit in 
New York, in their preparations for UNCTAD XIV in early 2016, in making development part and parcel of their work in each Council and Committ ee, and most importantly, at MC10. If he had 
failed to follow through on this promise, they had his assurance that he would continue to be an 
advocate from his Ambassador’s seat. 
13.10.  And the remainder of this year brought it s own stock of challenges – and no small ones. 
Members had important deadlines just around the corner with a view to making this year's 
Ministerial Conference another success. He did not think anyone carried illusions about the 
difficulties, but his very strong hope was that they not lose sight of the core values of the WTO and their importance. As this organization continued to mature in reaching its Twentieth Anniversary, 
they had come to appreciate more clearly the strength that this system held for its Members and 
in global governance. 
13.11.  The General Council had in Ambassador de Mateo a Chairman who treasured those values 
and who understood all of those points very well. He wished Ambassador de Mateo all the best in 
his role this year. Based on his own experience, he could assure him that he would always be able 
to count on the support of the whole Membership  and of the Secretariat, even in the most 
challenging moments. 
13.12.  On the basis of the understandings that ha d been reached on the appointment of officers 
to WTO bodies, he proposed that the General Council elected by acclamation H.E. Ambassador 
Fernando DE MATEO (Mexico) as the next Chairperson of this body. 
13.13.  The General Council so agreed. 
13.14.  The Director-General said a few words about the departing Chairman, Ambassador Fried. 
He had done a truly excellent job as Chairperson of the General Council. He had taken the position 
during a critical period in the history of this organization – just as Members had been trying to 
maintain the momentum that their success in Bali had provided. 
13.15.  As the year had progressed Members found themselves facing one of the most difficult 
challenges that they had ever faced in the sh ape of the impasse that they hit last summer. 
Ambassador Fried had played a vital role in steadying the ship and helping Members to overcome 
those challenges. Members had then regained the momentum that Bali had given them – and Ambassador Fried could take real credit for that fact. He had also played a key role in resolving 
many other challenges such as the Appellate Body  selection process. With each problem Members 
had faced, Ambassador Fried had brought his remarkable knowledge of WTO history and law to bear. He knew that Members were very grateful for the hard work and dedication Ambassador Fried had shown and for his staunch commitment to this organization.  
13.16.  He thanked Ambassador Fried personally for everything he had done, for the support that 
he had given to him and for his tireless efforts. Countless times during his Chairmanship his counsel had led to wiser decisions on his part. It had led to adjustments in the course Members 
had taken – and he was sure some icebergs had be en avoided thanks to him. He thought they had 
set out as close colleagues but over the course of the year they had become friends. So, in keeping with the tradition, he was delighted to present Ambassador Fried with the engraved gavel, 
as a memento of his time as Chairman of the General Council.  
13.17.  He also congratulated Ambassador de Mateo on his election. They had known each other 
for a long time. He already had the pleasure of working with him in his different capacities, including as Chairman of the Special Session of the Services Committee and, most recently, as 
Chair of the Dispute Settlement Body. Indeed, he thought this appointment was the recognition of 
the extensive work that he had carried out for the organization over the years. But he should not WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 33 - 
 
  give too much praise then but wait until after he had done the job! So he wished him all the best 
during this very important year for the WTO. He said that the Chair could count on his support as well as the support of the whole Secretariat, and he was also certain that Members would extend to the Chairman the support he needed.  
13.18.  The newly-elected Chairman said he was deeply honoured by the Members' decision to 
appoint him as the Chair of the General Council in what was a very special year – one that saw 
them celebrating the Twentieth Anniversary of the WTO and also holding the Tenth Ministerial 
Conference in Nairobi. 
13.19.  He was taking over the Chair from a great diplomat, an eminent jurist and a consummate 
professional with exceptional qualities. Ambassador Jonathan Fried was indeed a difficult act to follow as he had set the bar high with his work, widely recognized as outstanding. He hoped to be 
able to count on his knowledge and support in a year which might prove critical to the future of the 
organization. 
13.20.  Members were also lucky to have a Director-General who, in extremely complicated 
circumstances, had shown leadership and breathed  new life into the WTO. Last November, both 
the Director-General and Ambassador Fried had demo nstrated their negotiating skills by pushing 
through the decisions that had enabled the "Bali Package" to be finally adopted. 
13.21.  However, Members were still at the foot of the mountain and reaching the summit required 
perseverance and willpower. Then was the time when Members had to pull together in order to 
prove that the success in Bali and last year's re sults in respect of trade facilitation and public 
stockholding for food security purposes had not been one-off events, but rather a prelude 
heralding decisive steps towards the conclusion of the Doha Round. 
13.22.  Although for the outside world the WTO was defined by its negotiating function, it was 
clear to experts on the Multilateral Trading System that the organization transcended the results of 
trade rounds. Although such processes captured th e attention of the media, the truth was that it 
was the regular WTO bodies that kept the multil ateral machinery in good working order, thus 
ensuring proper implementation of the agreemen ts and enhancing transparency. Those were the 
bodies that did the preparation, and provided te chnical support, for the work of the negotiating 
groups, while acting as a forum for Members for the discussion and clarification of trade-related issues, thereby keeping conflicts between them to a minimum. 
13.23.  It was, however, also true that the functions of implementing and monitoring the 
agreements and their corollary, the Dispute Settlement Understanding, worked best when 
Members succeeded in adapting the organization to the new global economic realities. He sincerely 
hoped that Members would be able to take a decisive step in that direction in 2015. The WTO was 
but the sum of its Members. They, and they alone,  could inject fresh impetus. Superheroes existed 
only in comic strips or on cinema screens. Nobody apart from them would come to their aid in fulfilling their primary mission, namely to preserve  and strengthen the Multilateral Trading System. 
13.24.  It was therefore of fundamental importance for Members to achieve tangible results in all 
areas, including issues that, although not the subj ect of negotiations, featured on their day to day 
work agenda. Without reducing the intensity of th e negotiating groups, they needed to focus all 
their efforts and attention on the work of the regular committees. Achieving the goals that they 
had set themselves would require commitment, political will and active involvement on their part. 
13.25.  It had been said that a Chair was just a piece of furniture, but even as such it still had to 
be useful. As Chairman, his role was to facilitate dialogue. It was his pledge to Members that day 
that they might rest assured that, in close coordi nation with each and every one of them and with 
the Director-General, all his endeavours would be devoted to ensuring that the work of the General Council helped to enhance the relevance of the WTO in the context of global economic 
governance. 
13.26.  As Victor Hugo had said, " The future has many names: For the weak, it means the 
unattainable. For the fearful, it means the unknown. For the courageous, it means opportunity ". 
He urged Members to be courageous, as the world was calling on them to be, and to ensure that 
this opportunity did not pass them by. WT/GC/M/156 
 
- 34 - 
 
  13.27.  The representative of Tanzania thanked the outgoing and incoming Chairpersons. The 
meeting could not be adjourned without recognising the efforts of Ambassador Fried. When he had 
come as an Ambassador in August 2013, Ambassador Fried had just been starting and he had seen his courage, his work ethic, and the expert ise he had demonstrated. He had done a good job 
for the WTO and its Members. The way Ambassador Fried had handled the instances when 
Members had sometimes found themselves stuck could not be forgotten, and Ambassador Fried never failed to deliver. It was also very amazing that the Ambassador had been able to pick up the 
pieces so that they could continue with the process they had just started in Bali. He then said that 
Ambassador de Mateo's credentials were very elaborate. He trusted that he would follow in Ambassador Fried's footsteps and that Members would walk with him. His delegation would accord Ambassador de Mateo all the support he would need.  
13.28.  The General Council took note of the statements. 
__________