147. The representative of the Philippines said the provision called for an examination, which implied that all Members should start with an open mind as to whether or not non-violation and situation complaints were proper under the TRIPS Agreement. His delegation was not willing to believe the notion that it would be proper under the TRIPS Agreement merely because it was proper under the GATT. The basis could be different, as pointed out by Canada's paper. In this regard, he also drew attention to the fact that, to date, the general rule in public international law was that states were liable, in general, for the violation of treaties and that a parallel discussion was going on in the International Law Commission on non-violation complaints. At a certain stage of the discussion, although not immediately, he felt it would be useful to request the Secretariat for information on the present state of play in the International Law Commission on the evolution of the concept of liability of states in respect of acts not in violation of treaties.
