206. The representative of Argentina said that the concerns about piracy and counterfeiting were shared by all Members. He noted that the European Communities had recognized the substantial progress that had been made across the world in protecting intellectual property and that the vast majority of Members had implemented provisions on enforcement. Nevertheless, in a brief analysis on page 2 of its paper, the European Communities had voiced a concern over an increase in infringement cases and cited a series of cases which touched upon areas of responsibility of other international organizations and customs authorities, for example, cases of smuggling, transport of hazardous materials and pharmaceutical smuggling. It should be remembered that a series of conventions governed, for example, the transport of dangerous and hazardous materials and that the World Health Organization was competent in the area of pharmaceutical smuggling. The issues raised by the European Communities were, therefore, not questions that could be solved in the TRIPS Council, but were of relevance to various bodies and organizations such as the World Customs Organization, which had an interest in such issues.
207. He said that the EC interpretation, that Article 68 mandated the Council to focus on certain suggestions and initiatives which the European Communities had listed in paragraphs 23-27 of its paper, would give the supervisory task mentioned in Article 68 a very broad remit. His delegation did not share such an interpretation of Article 68 as a "policing power" of the TRIPS Council and considered that the EC suggestion, that the Council recommend, for example, benchmarks for assessment purposes, went beyond the competence of the Council. It was his delegation's view that the EC proposals in this context were, therefore, not appropriate and that the Council's already heavy agenda under this Round should not be further burdened by an issue that did not necessarily belong in this forum.