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

Ms Irene Young (Hong Kong, China)
Bolivia, Plurinational State of
115. Bolivia's position on this issue is well known. As far as Bolivia is concerned, non-violation complaints are not applicable in the TRIPS environment. The nature of rights and obligations as well as benefits are detailed in the Agreement itself and the benefits that Governments have decided to grant to each other has established a delicate balance which would be negatively affected if we brought non-violation complaints in and that would generate a great deal of uncertainties. This is the feeling of the overwhelming majority of WTO Members and this Council should proceed according to that reality and adopt a decision whereby non-violation complaints do not apply to the TRIPS Agreement.
The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matter at its next meeting.
18. The Chairperson recalled that, although the Council had not been able to agree on a recommendation on this matter, Ministers at the Eleventh Ministerial Conference (MC11) had decided that the Council should continue its examination of the scope and modalities for complaints of the types provided for under subparagraphs 1(b) and 1(c) of Article XXIII of GATT 1994; and make recommendations to their next Session to be held in 2019. It had also been agreed that, in the meantime, Members would not initiate such complaints under the TRIPS Agreement. The decision of the Ministerial Conference had been circulated in document WT/L/1033.

19. With this renewed instruction, she invited Members to share their views on how the Council should examine the scope and modalities for non-violation and situation (NVS) complaints. It appeared to her that repetition of the well-known arguments on whether or not such complaints should apply to TRIPS at all would not assist the Council in formulating the concrete recommendations that Ministers had asked for. She, therefore, welcomed any suggestions on how to break the impasse.

20. The representatives of India; South Africa; China; Brazil; the Plurinational State of Bolivia; the United States; Argentina; Haiti, on behalf of the LDC Group; Switzerland; Japan; Ecuador; and Canada took the floor.

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

IP/C/M/88, IP/C/M/88/Add.1