446. Bangladesh supports the statement delivered by Chad on behalf of the LDCs. My delegation appreciates your kind efforts for facilitating discussion on this important submission during the informal consultations and in the regular meetings of the Council.
447. During the October 2020 meeting of the Council, the LDC Group provided the rationale for this proposal. The LDC Group truly appreciates the overall sympathetic gesture and broad support from Members for this submission. The current transition period will end soon, and we request a positive outcome in favour of our proposal.
448. As the LDC coordinator has indicated, my delegation now takes this opportunity to answer some of the queries that some delegations have made. There is a question, whether the LDC Group is asking for a permanent extension and why do they need an uncertain time "as long as an LDC" for this extension. We emphasize that the requested extension is not permanent. It is for "as long as a country remains an LDC" and then a specific period post-graduation. We stress that all LDCs aspire to graduate. No LDC wishes to permanently remain as an LDC. The proposed duration is also "certain". Once an LDC graduates, a specific transition period will apply. So, the requested extension is neither permanent nor uncertain.
449. The next concern is why the LDCs need such an extension after graduation. Our group earlier responded to this question: The graduation criteria are based on GNI per capita, economic vulnerability and the human assets index. These criteria do not consider the development of a viable technological base and related productive capacities, which is a long-term process. These criteria also do not consider the various access challenges that are persistently and constantly faced even after an LDC graduates. Therefore, even upon graduation, a country will continue to need maximum policy space to develop its technological base and productive capacities.
450. As a follow up, some Members have also demanded justification for the proposed 12-year length of the transition period after graduation. The LDC Group is willing to discuss this with Members if the proposal in principle is accepted. The LDCs after graduation should have policy space for a longer duration and the LDC Group considers that the proposed 12-year duration for extension is justified.
451. The LDC coordinator has already responded to the question whether the LDC Group's proposal replaces the current pharmaceutical extension for the LDCs. My delegation would like to reemphasize that the LDC Group's duly motivated request is about the general transition period under Article 66.1 which covers all aspects of the TRIPS Agreement except for Articles 3, 4 and 5 of the Agreement. On the other hand, the pharmaceutical extension decision is specific to pharmaceutical products and related to Sections 5 and 7 of TRIPS. Both these decisions have been co-existing in a mutually supportive way since 2002.
452. The LDCs comprise around 12% of the world population but account for less than 2% of world GDP and around 1% of world trade. Therefore, extending the transition period to countries as long as in the LDC category, and an additional 12 years after graduation from the LDC category, will not impact the global community but would greatly benefit the LDCs by putting them on a sustainable development path. Considering their present constraints and future needs, the LDCs are seeking policy space for a longer period under the TRIPS Agreement. The LDCs are demanding nothing new but are requesting to continue the flexibilities already given to them for a few more years to support their smooth transition. Moreover, the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has severely heightened the vulnerability of LDCs to shocks beyond their control. The LDCs deserve special attention of the Members.
453. In conclusion, Bangladesh requests the Council to take a positive decision on this submission as proposed. My delegation will stand ready to engage actively with the Members.
