179. The representative of Brazil said that his delegation was one of the co-sponsors of document IP/C/W/385, which had been circulated to the TRIPS Council in September 2002. In this regard, his delegation fully associated itself with the statement made by the delegation of Peru. Brazil held firm to the belief that there was no room for the application of non-violation and situation complaints in the context of the TRIPS Agreement for the many reasons exposed in that document. He stated that attempts to apply non-violation complaints in the context of the TRIPS Agreement raised a number of systemic concerns, both for the TRIPS Agreement and for the multilateral trading system. As was stated in document IP/C/W/385, attempts to apply such claims in the context of TRIPS could introduce incoherence between WTO Agreements, upset the balance of rights and obligations under the TRIPS Agreement, undermine regulatory authority and limit flexibilities inherent in the TRIPS Agreement, among other reasons. For all of these reasons he believed that it was very important that the TRIPS Council recommend to the Fifth Ministerial Conference that non-violation and situation complaints should not be applicable in the context of TRIPS. He also asked those Members who wished to retain the right to apply such measures in the context of TRIPS to provide examples of situations in which they felt that a good faith application of TRIPS provisions would not be sufficient for the attainment of the objectives of the Agreement. He believed that if the Members who supported this view could perhaps elaborate on their concerns, the Council might be able to have a more interesting debate.
