5. The representative of Mexico said that, as far as his delegation was concerned, the differences of view were not limited to any proposed additional elements in paragraph 6 of the Secretariat background note. While the consultations had been useful and the said paragraph 6 contained useful elements with regard to notifications under Article 4(d), he wished to stress that there was no basis in Article 4(d) for the Council to conduct a review of notifications made. It was up to each individual Member to decide what international agreement it wished to notify under Article 4(d) and any Member which disagreed with the notifying Member as to the appropriateness of the notification, for example as to whether the international agreement notified constituted an arbitrary or unjustified discrimination, should seek recourse to the appropriate mechanisms in the WTO, in particular the dispute settlement mechanism. His delegation was open to further consultations aiming at a better understanding of the scope of paragraph 6 of the Secretariat background note, without modifying the rights and obligations of WTO Members under the provisions of Article 4(d). The representative of Peru expressed support for this statement.
