H.E. Ambassador Lundeg Purevsuren

India

6 NON-VIOLATION AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS

123.   India's position on the issue of non-violation complaints under the TRIPS Agreement remains unchanged. Serious concerns remain on the debilitating impact that non-violation complaints in TRIPS can have on the regulatory policy space of Members and on TRIPS flexibilities, thereby increasing the complexity in interpreting the TRIPS provisions. It can not only have a chilling effect on Member's exercise of their IP regimes but also severely restrain ability of Members to achieve public policy objectives. 124.   The absence of non-violation complaints in the TRIPS context does not in any manner threaten or dilute the enforceability of TRIPS related rights and obligations. Introducing non-violation and situation complaints into the TRIPS Agreement is unnecessary and inconsistent with the interests of the WTO Members. As such, any benefits arising from the Agreement can be adequately protected by applying the text of the Agreement in accordance with accepted principles of international law, without any need for introducing the legally uncertain notion of non-violation and situation complaints. 125.   India looks forward to working with like-minded Members in making non-violation complaints inapplicable to TRIPS. We also wish to reiterate that until there is a consensus on the scope and modalities of the applicability of NVCs to TRIPS, NVCs will not apply to the TRIPS Agreement.

The Council so took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matters at its next meeting.

16.   The Chair recalled that the initial mandate to examine the scope and modalities for non-violation and situation complaints, contained in Article 64.3 of the TRIPS Agreement, had required recommendations to be submitted in 1999. On 10 December 2019, the General Council had directed the TRIPS Council to continue its work and to make recommendations to the 12th Ministerial Conference (MC12). It was also agreed that, in the meantime, Members would not initiate such complaints under the TRIPS Agreement.
17.   He informed delegations that he had held two sets of informal consultations with a small group of the most active Members, on 17 and 31 January 2020. He had asked Members to explore how work could advance on this issue before the next meeting of the TRIPS Council, which was scheduled for 14-15 May 2020. However, there had not been further progress, even in an informal setting. He highlighted that MC12 was only 4 months away. It was, therefore, important that discussions soon begin to focus on concrete suggestions for the Council's recommendation for the Ministerial. As his chairmanship was concluding, he hoped that the incoming chair would be able to take up his or her duties very soon after nomination by the General Council, so as to allow for timely and focused work, and he encouraged delegations to support his successor during the challenging period ahead.
18.   The representatives of South Africa, on behalf of the African Group; Bangladesh; Egypt; Indonesia; Nigeria; Chinese Taipei; India; China; Chile; the United States of America; the Russian Federation; Switzerland; Japan; Canada; Norway; the Republic of Korea; and the Plurinational State of Bolivia took the floor.
19.   The Council so took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matters at its next meeting.

IP/C/M/94, IP/C/M/94/Add.1