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

Ambassador C. Trevor Clarke (Barbados)
176. The representative of Chile said that, while his delegation could obviously not force any delegation to come forward with a document, it believed that a legal text should normally be submitted, even when others did not accept it. In other WTO bodies such as the negotiating group on trade facilitation, Members were now going through third generation proposals. Initial ideas had become legal texts even if Members did not all like them. A full legal text proposal would be very helpful for important issues for developing countries, including Brazil. He recalled that Brazil had made a very strong statement a year ago on the importance of analysing the costs for developing countries, and since then the cost for developing countries had not become clearer. As regards the European Communities' comment on cost to the Secretariat, his delegation agreed that it would probably be more or less the same as that for the joint proposal, i.e. the cost of having a website and translating it. He also agreed with the European Communities on costs for governments when they consulted this database, but his delegation did not yet see what the costs would be for developing countries, for consumers and for producers who were using terms considered as generic in Chile. That was why it was important to have a legal text to compare with the joint proposal.
The Special Session took note of the statements made.