Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union in the World Trade Organization’s 12th Ministerial Conference
Date: 2021-11-04
Institutions: Directorate-General for Trade and Economic Security, European Commission
Subjects: TRIPS, World Trade Organisation, agricultural policy, coronavirus disease, cotton, epidemic, fisheries policy, food security, international trade, least-developed country, tariff quota

EN 

  EN 

   EUROPEAN COMMISSION  Brussels, 4.11.2021  COM(2021) 672 final 2021/0350 (NLE)  Proposal for a COUNCIL DECISION on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union in the World Trade Organization’s 12th Ministerial Conference  
 
EXPLANATORY MEMORANDUM 

1. 

SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PROPOSAL 

This  proposal  concerns  the  Council  decision  establishing  the  position  to  be  taken  on  the 
Union's  behalf  in  the  12th  Ministerial  Conference  of  the  World  Trade  Organization  in 
connection  with  the  envisaged  adoption  of  several  decisions.  This  proposal  covers  the 
following areas:  

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14. 

15. 

2. 

2.1. 

Fisheries subsidies 

Trade and health 

Measures related to intellectual property, as provided for in the TRIPS Agreement, in 
the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and other pandemics 

Transparency improvements in agriculture 

Domestic support in agriculture  

Public stockholding for food security purposes 

Export  restrictions  in  agriculture,  including  the  World  Food  Programme  exemption 
from export restrictions  

Export competition in agriculture 

Market access in agriculture 

Special safeguard mechanism (SSM) in agriculture 

Review  of  the  Understanding  on  Tariff  Rate  Quota  Administration  provisions  of 
Agricultural Products (Bali TRQ Decision)  

Cotton 

Least Developed Countries (LDCs) and Special and Differential Treatment (SDT) 

Notifications  

Trade concerns 

CONTEXT OF THE PROPOSAL 

The  Agreement  Establishing 
Agreement")  

the  World  Trade  Organization 

("WTO 

The Agreement Establishing the World Trade Organization (‘the WTO Agreement’) aims to 
achieve the objectives mentioned in  the preamble to  the Agreement. The  agreement  entered 
into force on 1 January 1995. 
The European Union (EU) is a party to the Agreement.1 All 27 EU Member States  are also 
parties to the Agreement. The WTO may take decisions in accordance with the procedures set 
out in the WTO Agreement. 

1 

Council  Decision  94/800/EC  of  22  December  1994  concerning  the  conclusion  on  behalf  of  the 
European  Community,  as  regard  matters  within  its  competence,  of  the  agreements  reached  in  the 
Uruguay Round of multilateral negotiations (1986-1994) OJ L 336 23.12.1994, p. 1. 

EN 

1 

  EN 

                                                 
2.2. 

The Ministerial Conference of the World Trade Organization 

The  Ministerial  Conference  is  the  highest  decision-making  body  of  the  WTO,  and  meets  at 
least once every two years. As a matter of practice, decisions are taken by consensus.  

The  next  meeting  of  the  Ministerial  Conference  will  take  place  in  Geneva,  Switzerland  (30 
November – 3 December 2021).  

The envisaged acts of the WTO Ministerial Conference  

2.3. 
On  3  December,  the  WTO’s  12th  Ministerial  Conference  (‘MC12’)  is  expected  to  adopt 
several decisions regarding: 

1. 

2. 

3. 

4. 

5. 

6. 

7. 

8. 

9. 

10. 

11. 

12. 

13. 

14. 

15. 

Fisheries subsidies 

Trade and health 

Measures related to intellectual property, as provided for in the TRIPS Agreement, in 
the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and other pandemics 

Transparency improvements in agriculture 

Domestic support in agriculture  

Public stockholding for food security purposes 

Export  restrictions  in  agriculture,  including  the  World  Food  Programme  exemption 
from export restrictions  

Export competition in agriculture 

Market access in agriculture 

Special safeguard mechanism (SSM) in agriculture 

Review of the Bali Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) Decision  

Cotton 

LDCs and SDT 

Notifications 

Trade concerns 

3. 

POSITION TO BE TAKEN ON THE UNION'S BEHALF 

The objective of this proposal is to allow the EU to join a possible consensus in the WTO on 
the adoption by the Ministerial Conference of the envisaged acts.  

While it is not yet clear if, and to what extent, WTO Members will be able to reach consensus, 
the EU position at MC12 has to be established in advance by the Council pursuant to Article 
218(9) TFEU.2  

It should be noted that the EU position to support the extension of the moratorium on customs 
duties on electronic transmissions and the extension of the moratorium on complaints of the 
types  provided  for  under  subparagraphs  1(b)  and  1(c)  of  Article  XXIII  of  the  General 

2 

To the extent that, contrary to the current expectations, the consensus was formalised in an international 
agreement  amending  the  WTO  Agreement  or  in  a  plurilateral  international  agreement  among  some 
WTO  Members,  the  Commission  would  make  the  necessary  proposals  in  accordance  with  Article 
218(6) TFEU following the adoption of the texts and their opening for acceptance by the MC12 or by 
the WTO Members concerned during MC12.  

EN 

2 

  EN 

                                                 
Agreement  on  Tariffs  and  Trade  1994  (non-violation  and  situation  complaints)  will  not  be 
included in this proposal as Council Decision (EU) 2015/2236 of 27 November 2015 provides 
that this can be done on an indefinite basis. 

The current proposal covers the following issues on which decisions may be taken: 

 

 

 

Fisheries subsidies: Reaching a multilateral  agreement on rules on the  elimination 
of certain fisheries subsidies is foreseen in the UN Sustainable Development Goal 14 
Target 6 ("SDG 14.6") agreed by Heads of States in 2015 and the WTO Ministerial 
Decision  of  13  December  2017  (WT/MIN(17)/64).  Negotiations  are  underway  and 
the EU should support an agreed outcome. 

in 

to  export  restrictions, 

like-minded  countries  (the  ‘Ottawa  Group’) 

Trade and Health:  Discussions  on Trade and  Health issues started in  2020 with  a 
proposal  of  13 
the  WTO 
(WTO/GC/223) of  24  November 2020 to  agree  on a Trade and Health  Initiative in 
response  to  the  current  and  future  pandemics.  The  EU  was  amongst  the  original 
proponents  of  the  initiative,  which  suggested  a  number  of  actions  related,  in 
trade  faciliating  measures  and  enhanced 
particular, 
transparency. The proposal also encouraged the WTO to cooperate more closely with 
other international organizations in  the work on  crisis  preparedness.  Over time, the 
number  of  co-sponsors  increased  to  26.  A  revised  proposal  for  a  Draft  General 
Council  Declaration  was  tabled  in  the  WTO  on  15  July  2021  (WT/GC/W/823) 
regarding  the  trade  policy  response  to  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and  to  enhance 
resilience  against  future  pandemics.  The  EU  should  support  a  potential  outcome  in 
this  area  on  export  restrictions,  trade  facilitating  measures,  enhanced  transparency 
and  other  elements  included  in  the  latest  proposal  for  a  draft  General  Council 
Declaration.  This  may  also  include  a  WTO  work  programme  for  the  work  post 
MC12,  the  objective  of  which  would  be  to  enhance  Members’  resilience  against 
future pandemics. 

Measures  related  to  intellectual  property,  as  provided  for  in  the  TRIPS 
Agreement,  in  the  circumstances  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and  other 
pandemics:  These negotiations  are part  of the ongoing discussions in  the WTO on 
how  the  trade  system  can  enhance  global  access  to  COVID-19  vaccines  and 
therapeutics. On 21 May 2021, a number of WTO Members submitted to the WTO 
Council  for  TRIPS  a  communication  with  a  revised  proposal  for  a  waiver  from 
certain  provisions  of  the  TRIPS  Agreement  for  the  prevention,  containment  and 
treatment  of  COVID-19  (IP/C/W/669/Rev.1).  On  4  June  2021,  the  EU  submitted  a 
communication  on  Urgent  trade  policy  responses  to  the  COVID-19  crisis  to  the 
WTO  General  Council  (WT/GC/231)  and  a  communication  on  Urgent  trade  policy 
responses  to  the  COVID-19  crisis:  intellectual  property  to  the  WTO  Council  for 
TRIPS (IP/C/W/680). On 18 June 2021, the EU submitted to the WTO Council for 
TRIPS  a  Communication  with  a  draft  Declaration  on  the  TRIPS  Agreement  and 
Public  Health  in  the  circumstances  of  a  pandemic  (IP/C/W/681).  The  draft 
declaration  aims  to  clarify  or  facilitate  the  use  of  the  compulsory  licensing  system 
provided  for  in  the  TRIPS  Agreement,  in  order  to  make  it  work  as  efficiently  as 
possible in the circumstances of a pandemic. Given the importance of this issue, the 
EU  should  support  an  outcome  in  accordance  with  the  EU  Communications 
mentioned  above.  At  the  same  time,  the  position  to  be  taken  on  the  EU’s  behalf 
should be sufficiently flexible to take account of the dynamic nature of the ongoing 
text-based  process  including  as  regards  the  instrument  used  by  the  Ministerial 
Conference.  In  particular,  the  EU  should  remain  open  to  accepting  other  elements 
aiming  to  enhance  or  simplify  the  use  of  existing  flexibilities  provided  for  in  the 

EN 

3 

  EN 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TRIPS  Agreement  in  the  circumstances  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic,  other 
pandemics  or  other  circumstances  of  extreme  urgency  related  to  public  health  that 
other WTO Members may propose. 

Transparency  improvements  in  agriculture:  The  EU  strongly  believes  that  its 
proposal (JOB/AG/213) for a Ministerial Decision on transparency improvements in 
agriculture co-sponsored by Canada, Japan and the United States could constitute a 
basis  for  a  decision  at  MC12.  The  proposal  includes  ideas  for  transparency 
improvements  across  the  board  in  agriculture.  This  is  an  important  initiative  for 
MC12  considering  that  the  pandemic  has  renewed  the  importance  of  greater 
transparency and predictability of agricultural support and trade. This initiative could 
be  a  credible  element  of  a  food  security  agenda  indicated  by  the  WTO  Director 
General as a priority for MC12. 

Domestic support in agriculture: Negotiations on trade-distorting domestic support 
are  embedded  in  Article  20  of  the  WTO  Agreement  on  Agriculture  and  have  been 
part  of  the  Doha  Development  Agenda  (DDA)  mandate,  as  embodied  in  the  Doha 
Ministerial  Declaration  of  14  November  2001  (WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1).  Given  the 
divergence of positions in the negotiations, the EU sees as a possible outcome a post-
MC12 work programme on a reform of trade distorting domestic support.  

Public stockholding for food security purposes: Negotiations aim at agreeing on a 
'permanent  solution'  fulfilling  the  goal  set  out  in  the  Bali  Ministerial  Decision  of  7 
December  2013  on  Public  Stockholding 
for  Food  Security  Purposes 
(WT/MIN(13)/38-WT/L/913),  as  interpreted  by  the  subsequent  General  Council 
Decision of 27 November 2014 (WT/L/939). This goal was repeated in the Nairobi 
Ministerial Decision of 19 December 2015 (WT/MIN(15)/44-WT/L/979). This issue 
may be part of the work programme on domestic support.  

including 

in  agriculture:  Negotiations  on  export  restrictions 

in 
Export  restrictions 
agriculture, 
the  World  Food  Programme  exemption  from  export 
restrictions,  have  shown  that  a  large  part  of  the  WTO  Membership  supports  the 
commitment not to impose such restrictions on purchases for humanitarian purposes. 
Given the importance of the issue, the EU should continue to support the proposal for 
a Ministerial Decision on this matter, which could constitute an important element of 
a food security package at MC12. The EU should support an agreed outcome. 

Export competition in agriculture: While we see a need to seek improvements to 
both  transparency  and  disciplines  in  export  competition,  the  reality  of  negotiations 
shows that there is only limited interest. There is, however, some chance of progress 
on transparency improvements for MC12.  Indeed,  the EU included several  ideas in 
this  respect  in  our  co-sponsored  proposal  (JOB/AG/213)  for  a  Ministerial  Decision 
on transparency improvements in agriculture. Also in the area of export competition, 
a triennial review of the Nairobi Decision on Export Competition (WT/MIN(15/45)) 
is  ongoing in the regular Committee on Agriculture  as mandated in  paragraph 5 of 
that  decision.  The  purpose  is  to  review  the  disciplines  contained  in  the  decision.  It 
has been agreed to postpone the review until the next meeting of the Committee on 
Agriculture in March 2022. Such agreement may require a Ministerial level decision 
at MC12. The EU is supportive of this postponement. 

Market  access  in  agriculture:  Discussions  on  market  access  negotiations  in 
agriculture have shown that there is no appetite or realistic chance for any revival of 
tariff  reduction  negotiations  at  the  WTO  any  time  soon.  Nevertheless,  some  of  the 
WTO  Members  have  made  proposals  which  aim  at  launching  negotiations  post 

EN 

4 

  EN 

MC12  including  a  proposal  in  the  area  of  tariff  simplification  containing  the 
calculations of Ad Valorem Equivalents (AVEs). The EU sees transparency elements 
as  the  only  possible  outcome  in  market  access.  This  should  include  the  proposal 
(JOB/AG/212) by Australia, Brazil, Canada and Ukraine on transparency in applied 
tariff changes and treatment of goods en route where the EU is supportive. The EU 
should support an agreed outcome. 

Special  safeguard  mechanism  (SSM)  in  agriculture:  Given  the  divergence  of 
positions  and  lack  of  engagement  of  Members,  no  outcome  is  expected  at  MC12. 
Nevertheless, the EU has an interest to ensure that SSM is not negotiated as a stand-
alone element, but rather as part of the wider market access negotiations. 

Review of the Bali Tariff Rate Quota (TRQ) Decision: Discussions on the review 
of the Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration provisions of Agricultural 
Products, as defined in Article 2 of the Agreement on Agriculture (WT/MIN(13)/39, 
WT/L/914))  should  reach  a  result  by  31  December  2021.  The  current  unequal 
coverage  of  the  decision  exempting  the  US  and  developing  countries  from  the 
underfill mechanism is not acceptable. Considering the discussions take place in the 
regular Committee on Agriculture it is possible that a General Council level outcome 
would  be  considered  instead  of  a  Ministerial  outcome.  The  EU  should  support  an 
agreed outcome. 

Cotton:  Given  the  divergence  of  positions  in  the  negotiations,  the  most  likely 
outcome for MC12 would be some transparency improvements. The EU has included 
an idea on transparency in cotton in the co-sponsored proposal (JOB/AG/213) for a 
Ministerial Decision on transparency improvements in agriculture. 

LDCs and SDT: Negotiations on SDT provisions are part of the DDA and a possible 
outcome  at  MC12  may  clarify  existing  provisions  or  grant  additional  SDT  for  the 
LDC group and possibly other vulnerable WTO Members. Given the importance of 
the issue the EU should support an agreed outcome. 

Notifications: In view of the need to improve the transparency and compliance with 
existing  notification  requirements,  the  EU  put  forward  a  proposal  for  a  General 
Council Decision on Procedures to Enhance Transparency and Improve Compliance 
with  Notification  Requirements  under  WTO  Agreements  (JOB/GC/204/Rev.7). 
Negotiations are underway and the EU should support an agreed outcome. 

Trade  concerns:  Seeking  to  strengthen  the  effectiveness  of  the  work  of  regular 
WTO  councils  and  committees,  notably  as  regards  the  consideration  of  trade 
concerns, the EU submitted a proposal to the WTO on a General Council Decision 
on  Procedural  Guidelines  for  WTO  Councils  and  Committees  Addressing  Trade 
Concerns  (WT/GC/W/777/Rev.6).  Negotiations  are  underway  and  the  EU  should 
support an agreed outcome. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Since negotiations are currently ongoing on all elements above, the Commission expects that 
the Council will take its decision on the EU position on the outcome of the negotiations once 
the  situation  regarding  the  relevant  texts  becomes  clear  during  the  Ministerial  Conference 
itself.  

The  initiative  is  fully  consistent  with  existing  policy  provisions.  Similar  decisions  were 
prepared  for  previous  WTO  Ministerial  Conferences,  including  most  recently  for  the  11th 
WTO Ministerial Conference in 2017.  

EN 

5 

  EN 

4. 

LEGAL BASIS 

4.1. 

Procedural legal basis 

4.1.1.  Principles 

Article 218(9) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) provides for 
decisions establishing ‘the positions to be adopted on the Union’s behalf in a body set up by 
an  agreement,  when  that  body  is  called  upon  to  adopt  acts  having  legal  effects,  with  the 
exception of acts supplementing or amending the institutional framework of the agreement.’ 

The concept of ‘acts having legal effects’ includes acts that have legal effects by virtue of the 
rules of international law governing the body in question. It also includes instruments that do 
not  have  a  binding  effect  under  international  law,  but  that  are  ‘capable  of  decisively 
influencing the content of the legislation adopted by the EU legislature’3. 

4.1.2.  Application to the present case 

The  WTO  Ministerial  Conference  is  a  body  set  up  by  an  agreement,  namely  the  WTO 
Agreement, which according to Article IV:1 of the WTO Agreement has the authority to take 
decisions  on  all  matters  covered  under  any  of  the  multilateral  trade  agreements,  including 
decisions having legal effects. 

The envisaged acts  mentioned above constitute acts  having legal  effects,  as they may affect 
the rights and obligations of the Union. 

The  envisaged  acts  do  not  supplement  or  amend  the  institutional  framework  of  the 
Agreement. 

Therefore, the procedural legal basis for the proposed decision is Article 218(9) TFEU. 

4.2. 

Substantive legal basis 

4.2.1.  Principles 

The  substantive  legal  basis  for  a  decision  under  Article  218(9)  TFEU  depends  primarily  on 
the objective and content of the envisaged act in respect of which a position is taken on the 
Union's behalf.  If the  envisaged act  pursues two  aims or has two components  and if one of 
those  aims  or  components  is  identifiable  as  the  main  one,  whereas  the  other  is  merely 
incidental, the decision under Article 218(9) TFEU must be founded on a single substantive 
legal basis, namely that required by the main or predominant aim or component. 

4.2.2.  Application to the present case 

The  main  objective  and  content  of  the  envisaged  acts  relate  to  the  common  commercial 
policy, as the envisaged possible decisions on DDA issues fall thereunder. 

The substantive legal basis of the proposed decision, therefore, is Article 207 TFEU. 

4.3. 

Conclusion 

The  legal  basis  of  the  proposed  decision  should  be  Article  207  TFEU  in  conjunction  with 
Article 218(9) TFEU. 

3 

Judgment  of 
ECLI:EU:C:2014:2258, paragraphs 61 to 64.  

the  Court  of  Justice  of  7  October  2014,  Germany  v  Council,  C-399/12, 

EN 

6 

  EN 

                                                 
2021/0350 (NLE) 

Proposal for a 

COUNCIL DECISION 

on the position to be taken on behalf of the European Union in the World Trade 
Organization’s 12th Ministerial Conference 

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION, 

Having  regard  to  the  Treaty  on  the  Functioning  of  the  European  Union,  and  in  particular 
Article 207(4), first subparagraph, in conjunction with Article 218(9) thereof, 

Having regard to the proposal from the European Commission, 

Whereas: 

(1) 

(2) 

(3) 

(4) 

(5) 

(6) 

The  Marrakesh  Agreement  Establishing  the  World  Trade  Organization  (‘the  WTO 
Agreement’)  was  concluded  by  the  Union  by  Council  Decision  94/800/EC  of  22 
December 19944 and entered into force on 1 January 1995.  

Pursuant to Articles IV:1 and IX:1 of the WTO Agreement, the Ministerial Conference 
of the World Trade Organization (‘WTO’) may adopt decisions by consensus. 

The  WTO  Ministerial  Conference,  during  its  12th  meeting  on  30  November  –  3 
December  2021,  may  adopt  decisions  on  Fisheries  subsidies,  Trade  and  health, 
Measures related to intellectual property, as provided for in the TRIPS Agreement in 
the  circumstances  of  the  COVID-19  pandemic  and  other  pandemics,  Transparency 
improvements in agriculture, Domestic support in agriculture, Public stockholding for 
food  security  purposes,  Export  restrictions  in  agriculture,  including  the  World  Food 
Programme  exemption  from  export  restrictions,  Export  competition  in  agriculture, 
Market  access  in  agriculture,  Special  safeguard  mechanism  (SSM)  in  agriculture, 
Review  of  the  Bali  Tariff  Rate  Quota  (TRQ)  Decision,  Cotton,  LDCs  and  SDT, 
Notifications, and Trade concerns. 

It is appropriate to establish the position to be taken on the Union's behalf in the WTO 
Ministerial Conference, as the decisions are binding on the Union. 

Negotiations on fisheries subsidies are part of the Doha Devleopment Agenda (DDA) 
and  were  identified  as  a  priority  in  UN  Sustainable  Development  Goal  14  Target  6 
("SDG 14.6") agreed by Heads of States in 2015 and the WTO Ministerial Decision of 
13 December 2017 (WT/MIN(17)/64). Given the importance of the issue for trade and 
sustainable development, and the fact that the Union has been one of the proponents, 
the Union should support an agreed outcome. 

Discussions  on  Trade  and  Health  issues  started  in  2020  with  a  proposal  of  13  like-
minded  countries  (the  so-called  Ottawa  Group)  in  the  WTO  (WTO/GC/223)  of  24 
November 2020 to agree on a “Trade and Health Initiative” in response to the current 
and future pandemics. The EU was amongst the original proponents of the initiative. A 
revised proposal for a Draft General Council Declaration was tabled in the WTO on 15 
July  2021  (WT/GC/W/823)  regarding  the  trade  policy  response  to  the  COVID-19 

4 

OJ L 336, 23.12.1994, p. 1. 

EN 

7 

  EN 

                                                 
(7) 

(8) 

(9) 

pandemic and to enhance resilience against future pandemics. Given the importance of 
the issue, the Union should support an outcome in this area. 

Negotiations on measures related to intellectual property, as provided for in the TRIPS 
Agreement, in the circumstances of a pandemic, including the COVID-19 pandemic, 
are part of the ongoing discussions in the WTO on how the trade system can enhance 
global access to COVID-19 vaccines and therapeutics. On 21 May 2021, a number of 
WTO  Members  submitted  to  the  WTO  Council  for  TRIPS  a  communication  with  a 
revised proposal for a waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the 
prevention, containment and treatment of COVID-19 (IP/C/W/669/Rev.1). On 4 June 
2021  the  Union  submitted  a  communication  on  Urgent  trade  policy  responses  to  the 
COVID-19 crisis to the WTO General Council (WT/GC/231) and a communication on 
Urgent  trade  policy  responses  to  the  COVID-19  crisis:  intellectual  property  to  the 
WTO  Council  for  TRIPS  (IP/C/W/680).  On  18  June  2021  the  EU  submitted  to  the 
WTO  Council  for  TRIPS  a  Communication  with  a  draft  Declaration  on  the  TRIPS 
Agreement  and  Public  Health  in  the  circumstances  of  a  pandemic  (IP/C/W/681), 
which aims to clarify or facilitate the use of the compulsory licensing system provided 
for in the TRIPS Agreement, in order to make it work as efficiently as possible in the 
circumstances  of  a  pandemic.  Given  the  importance  of  this  issue,  the  Union  should 
support an outcome in accordance with the EU Communications mentioned above. At 
the  same  time,  the  position  to  be  taken  on  the  EU’s  behalf  should  be  sufficiently 
flexible  to  take  account  of  the  dynamic  nature  of  the  ongoing  text-based  process 
including as regards the instrument used by the Ministerial Conference. In particular, 
the EU should remain open to accepting other elements aiming to enhance or simplify 
the  use  of  existing  flexibilities  provided  for  in  the  TRIPS  Agreement  in  the 
circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic, other pandemics or other circumstances of 
extreme urgency related to public health that other WTO Members may propose. 

Negotiations  on  transparency  improvements  in  agriculture  as  a  cross-cutting  issue 
have gained renewed attention during the COVID-19 pandemic due to its contribution 
to  keeping  trade  flows  open.  Transparency  is  an  essential  element  for  monitoring 
obligations  under  the  Agreement  on  Agriculture,  for  informing  negotiations,  and  for 
ensuring  fair,  effective,  and  resilient  agricultural  markets  and  trade.  Given  the 
importance of the issue, the Union together with Canada, Japan and the United States 
have  made  a  proposal  for  a  Ministerial  Decision  on  transparency  improvements  in 
agriculture (JOB/AG/213) and therefore the Union should support an agreed outcome. 

in 

Negotiations  on  trade-distorting  domestic  support  are  embedded  in  Article  20  of  the 
WTO  Agreement  on  Agriculture  and  have  been  part  of  the  DDA  mandate,  as 
the  Doha  Ministerial  Declaration  of  14  November  2001 
embodied 
(WT/MIN(01)/DEC/1). Given the divergence of positions in the negotiations, the EU 
sees  as  a  possible  outcome  a  post-MC12  work  programme  on  a  reform  of  trade 
distorting  domestic  support.  Given  the  importance  of  the  issue  the  Union  should 
support an agreed outcome. 

(10)  Negotiations aim at agreeing on a 'permanent solution' fulfilling the goal set out in the 
Bali  Ministerial  Decision  of  7  December  2013  on  Public  Stockholding  for  Food 
Security  Purposes  (WT/MIN(13)/38-WT/L/913),  as  interpreted  by  the  subsequent 
General Council Decision of 27 November 2014 (WT/L/939). This goal was repeated 
in  the  Nairobi  Ministerial  Decision  of  19  December  2015  (WT/MIN(15)/44-
WT/L/979).  Given  the  importance  of  the  issue  the  Union  should  support  an  agreed 
outcome. This issue may be part of the work programme on domestic support.  

EN 

8 

  EN 

(11)  Negotiations  on  export  restrictions  in  agriculture,  including  the  World  Food 
Programme  exemption  from  export  restrictions  have  shown  that  a  large  part  of  the 
WTO  Membership  supports  the  commitment  not  to  impose  such  restrictions  on 
purchases for humanitarian purposes. Given the proposal for a Ministerial Decision on 
this matter and the fact that this is an important element of a food security package at 
MC12, the Union should support an agreed outcome. 

(12)  A  triennial  review  of  the  disciplines  contained  in  the  Nairobi  Decision  on  Export 
Competition (WT/MIN(15/45) is ongoing in the regular Committee on Agriculture as 
mandated in  paragraph 5 of that decision.  It  has  been agreed to  postpone the review 
until  the  next  meeting  of  the  Committee  on  Agriculture  in  March  2022.  Such 
agreement may require a Ministerial level decision at MC12. The EU is supportive of 
this  postponement.  Moreover,  the  discussions  have  shown  a  certain  interest  of  the 
Membership  in  transparency  improvements  in  export  competition.  Indeed,  the  EU 
included several ideas in this respect in its co-sponsored proposal (JOB/AG/213) for a 
Ministerial  Decision  on  transparency  improvements  in  agriculture.  Given  that  the 
Union has been one of the proponents, it should support an agreed outcome. 

(13)  Discussions on market access negotiations in agriculture have shown that there is no 
appetite or realistic chance for any revival of tariff reduction negotiations at the WTO 
any time soon. Nevertheless, some of the WTO Members have made proposals which 
aim  at  launching  negotiations  post  MC12  including  a  proposal  in  the  area  of  tariff 
simplification containing the calculations of Ad Valorem Equivalents (AVEs). The EU 
sees transparency elements as the only possible outcome in market access. This should 
include  the  proposal  (JOB/AG/212)  by  Australia,  Brazil,  Canada  and  Ukraine  on 
transparency in applied tariff changes and treatment of goods en route where the EU is 
supportive. The Union should support an agreed outcome. 

(14)  Discussions on the Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM) in agriculture have continued 
pursuant  to  the  proposals  on  the  table  and  the  Nairobi  Ministerial  Decision 
(WT/MIN(15)/43  -  WT/L/978).  Given  the  divergence  of  positions  and  lack  of 
engagement of Members, no outcome is expected at MC12. Nevertheless, the EU has 
an interest to ensure that SSM is not negotiated as a stand-alone element. The Union 
should  thus  support  an  outcome  on  SSM  only  if  it  forms  part  of  the  wider  market 
access negotiations. 

(15)  Discussions on the review of the Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration 
provisions  of  Agricultural  Products,  as  defined  in  Article  2  of  the  Agreement  on 
Agriculture  (WT/MIN(13)/39,  WT/L/914))  should  reach  a  result  by  31  December 
2021. The current unequal coverage of the decision exempting the US and developing 
countries from the underfill mechanism is not acceptable. Considering the discussions 
take  place  in  the  regular  Committee  on  Agriculture  it  is  possible  that  a  General 
Council  level  outcome  would  be  considered  instead  of  a  Ministerial  outcome.  The 
Union should support an agreed outcome. 

(16)  Discussions on cotton have continued in the framework set up in paragraphs 5, 6 and 7 
of  the  Bali  Ministerial  Decision  on  Cotton  (WT/MIN(13)/41  -  WT/L/916  )  and  in 
paragraph  14  of  the  Nairobi  Ministerial  Decision  on  Cotton  (WT/MIN(15)/46  - 
WT/L/981).  Given  the  divergence  of  positions  in  the  negotiations,  the  most  likely 
outcome  for  MC12  could  be  some  transparency  improvements.  The  Union  should 
support an agreed outcome. 

(17)  Negotiations  on  Special  and  Differential  Treatment  provisions  are  part  of  the  DDA 
and  a  possible  outcome  at  MC12  may  clarify  existing  provisions  or  grant  additional 

EN 

9 

  EN 

SDT  for  the  LDC  group  and  possibly  other  vulnerable  WTO  Members.  Given  the 
importance of the issue, the Union should support an agreed outcome. 

(18)  Discussions  on  notifications  are  ongoing  in  the  General  Council  as  regards  the 
proposals on a General Council Decision on Procedures to Enhance Transparency and 
Improve  Compliance  with  Notification  Requirements  under  WTO  Agreements 
(JOB/GC/204/Rev.7).  Given  the  importance  of  improving  the  transparency  and 
compliance with existing notification requirements and the Union’s role as one of the 
proponents of the proposal, the Union should support an agreed outcome in this area. 

(19)  Discussions  on  trade  concerns  are  ongoing  in  the  General  Council  as  regards  the 
Decision  on  Procedural  Guidelines  for  WTO  Councils  and  Committees  Addressing 
Trade  Concerns  (WT/GC/W/777/Rev.6).  Given  the  importance  of  strengthening  the 
effectiveness of the work of regular WTO councils and committees, notably as regards 
the consideration of trade concerns and the Union’s role as one of the proponents of 
the proposal, the Union should support an agreed outcome in this area, 

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION: 

Article 1 
The  position  to  be  taken  on  the  Union's  behalf  in  the  12th  session  of  the  WTO  Ministerial 
Conference shall be: 

To  join  the  consensus  reached  among  WTO  Members  with  a  view  to  adopting  decisions 
regarding  Fisheries subsidies, Trade and health,  Measures related to intellectual property, as 
provided for in the TRIPS Agreement in the circumstances of the COVID-19 pandemic and 
other pandemics, Transparency improvements in agriculture, Domestic support in agriculture, 
Public stockholding for food security purposes, Export restrictions in agriculture including the 
World  Food  Programme  exemption  from  export  restrictions,  Export  competition  in 
agriculture, Market access in agriculture, Special safeguard mechanism (SSM) in agriculture, 
Review  of  the  Bali  Tariff  Rate  Quota  (TRQ)  Decision5,  Cotton,  LDCs  and  SDT, 
Notifications, and Trade concerns.  

This Decision is addressed to the Commission. 

Done at Brussels, 

Article 2 

For the Council 
The President 

5 

Having  regard  to  Article  IV:2,  second  sentence,  of  the  WTO  Agreement,  this  includes  a  possible 
consensus  reached  among  WTO  Members  on  the  adoption  of  a  decision  regarding  the  Review  of  the 
Understanding on Tariff Rate Quota Administration provisions of Agricultural Products, as defined in 
Article  2  of  the  Agreement  on  Agriculture  (WT/MIN(13)/39,  WT/L/914))  (Bali  Tariff  Rate  Quota 
(TRQ) Decision) in a meeting of the General Council.  

EN 

10 

  EN