51. The representative of Argentina recalled that her delegation did not support the parallelism proposed in document TN/C/W/52. As a co-sponsor, her delegation reiterated its support for the joint proposal which complied with the mandate of Article 23.4 of the TRIPS Agreement and paragraph 18 of the Doha Declaration. The joint proposal had had a high level of acceptance by the Members of the WTO. It proposed the establishment of a multilateral system of certification and registration of geographical indications of wines and spirits that would facilitate the protection of geographical indications of wines and spirits. It preserved the territorial nature of intellectual property rights of geographical indications. In line with Article 23.4 of the TRIPS Agreement the participation in the Register was strictly voluntary. This also implied that the joint proposal took into consideration special and differential treatment given that each Member State could decide whether or not to participate.
52. She said that the delegation of the European Union had still not explained how special and differential treatment would be available under their proposal in document TN/C/W/52. Furthermore, the mandatory participation proposed in that proposal was not acceptable to her delegation. Under the procedures for full participating Members in paragraph 5 of the joint proposal, each Member would guarantee that their procedures provide for consultation of the database when making decisions relative to the protection of trademarks or geographical indications of wines and spirits in line with its domestic legislation. Regarding the proposal in TN/C/W/52, the legal effect of prima facie evidence, the extra territorial nature of the proposal and the inherent reversal of the burden of proof were not acceptable to her delegation.
