Minutes - TRIPS Council - View details of the intervention/statement

Ms Irene Young (Hong Kong, China)
Bolivia, Plurinational State of
105. Like other delegations have also mentioned the Plurinational State of Bolivia believes that non-violation and situation complaints do not apply in the context of intellectual property. Along with a large majority of Members, Bolivia submitted a document IP/C/W/385 with a large amount of information and analysis as to why non-violation and situation complaints should not apply to intellectual property. Applying such complaints would have a very negative impact on the capacity of each Member to regulate in various areas and that is not acceptable for many Members of this Organization. We are not going to repeat the arguments contained in document IP/C/W/385, but we would like to reiterate our position that the TRIPS Council should recommend to the 11th Ministerial Conference to adopt a decision that non-violation and situation complaints identified in Para 1(b) and 1(c) of Article XXIII of GATT 1994 should not be applicable to the TRIPS Agreement.
The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter, at its next meeting.
20. The Chairperson recalled that, at the tenth Ministerial Conference in December 2015, Ministers had directed the Council to continue its examination of the scope and modalities for complaints of the types provided for in Article XXIII 1(b) and 1(c) of the GATT 1994, and to make recommendations to the eleventh Ministerial Conference, scheduled to take place in December 2017. That instruction had mirrored the original mandate, contained in Article 64.3 of the TRIPS Agreement, which had set 1999 as the deadline for accomplishing this task. She noted that, so far, the Council had not yet been able to find a solution. She urged Members to provide more concrete ideas on how the Council could work towards fulfilling the mandate and on a recommendation for the eleventh Ministerial Conference, which would take place in merely six months. She noted that existing positions of Members were well documented, so there was no need to repeat them.

21. The representatives of Switzerland; India; Brazil; Argentina; the Plurinational State of Bolivia; South Africa; China; Ecuador; the United States; Japan; and, Sri Lanka took the floor.

22. The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to this matter, at its next meeting.

IP/C/M/86, IP/C/M/86/Add.1