163. The representative of Bangladesh thanked developed country Members for the submission of their reports in pursuance of the TRIPS Council decision of 19 February 2003 and said that his delegation associated itself with the statement made by the delegation of Lesotho on behalf of the LDCs. At the request of the LDCs, a day-long workshop had been held on 27 October 2008 to enhance the understanding of LDCs in respect of the annual submissions of developed countries in compliance with the obligation under Article 66.2. His delegation hoped that the workshop would bring more transparency in the future reports of developed country Members.
164. The provisions of Article 66.2 were mandatory in nature and not best-endeavour clauses. Ministers in Doha had instructed the TRIPS Council to put in place a mechanism for ensuring full implementation of the obligations in Article 66.2, the main objective of which was to help LDCs create a sound and viable technological base by transferring technology from developed country Members. He said that, at the Maseru Conference, LDC Ministers had urged developed country Members to provide incentives to enterprises and institutions in their territories that achieved effective technology transfer to LDCs and that went beyond workshops and seminars. LDC Ministers had also stressed the need for establishing a monitoring mechanism to review the situations where enterprises and institutions of developed country Members had transferred technology to LDCs as a result of such incentives in order to create a sound and viable technological base.
165. He said that, as Article 66.2 was dedicated to LDC Members, the reporting should also be dedicated to LDCs. Reviewing different submissions, his delegation had seen that not all developed country Members had shown their programmes LDC-wise and project-wise. LDCs needed information of the appropriate kind and a clear understanding of the reporting system under Article 66.2 so as to evaluate whether and how it benefited LDCs. He said that his delegation was not saying that developed country Members should have dedicated programmes for LDCs but that the reporting should be LDC-wise. This would help ascertain from LDC capitals the status of the programmes in question.
166. He said that there should be a common understanding between developed country Members and recipient LDCs about the types of incentives given by each government agency or other entity and the effectiveness of these incentives in promoting and encouraging transfer of technology. His delegation had noticed that there were different perceptions about technology transfer and suggested that a common definition could be followed. His delegation understood that the private sector in developed country Members could play an important role in transfer of technology and that developed country governments could create an enabling atmosphere by providing incentives to their domestic institutions and enterprises.
167. The TRIPS Council decision of 19 February 2003 called for new detailed reports to be provided every third year and annual updates every other year. He requested the Secretariat to inform his delegation of the reports made by each developed country Member. His delegation sought information on: (i) the type of technology that had been transferred by enterprises and institutions and the term on which it had been transferred; (ii) the mode of technology transferred; (iii) specific LDCs to which developed country enterprises and institutions had transferred technology; (iv) the extent to which incentives were specific to LDCs; and (v) any additional information that would help assess the effects of measures in promoting and encouraging transfer of technology to LDCs.
168. He reiterated the request made by the delegation of Lesotho that another similar workshop be organized for the next year, back to back with the year-end TRIPS Council meeting.
