Actas - Consejo de los ADPIC - Ver detalles de la intervención/declaración

Ambassador Yonov Agah (Nigeria)
201. The representative of Uganda recalled that the TRIPS Council Decision of 29 November 2005 had extended the transition period for LDCs to implement the TRIPS Agreement until 1 July 2013. Paragraph 2 had invited LDC Members to provide as much information as possible to the Council, preferably by 1 January 2008, on their individual priority needs for technical and financial cooperation in order to assist them in taking steps necessary for implementing the Agreement. It was against this background that Uganda was presenting its needs assessment (IP/C/W/500). It was Uganda's hope that developed country partners would also live up to its expectations in responding positively by providing the required technical and financial assistance and by promoting the needed technology transfer for the benefit of Uganda during this transition period. Uganda was fully aware of its international obligations and the need to implement the Agreement. However, there were several constraints that had to be addressed. In this regard, Uganda's communication was a reflection of the priority needs and set out a plan of action for technical and financial assistance seen as a pre-requisite to implement the Agreement by Uganda at an appropriate time in future. 202. Uganda's communication pointed out that IP was a cross-cutting issue where complementary policies on, for instance, health, agriculture, environment and competition were equally important in the context of implementing the Agreement. In this regard, implementation needed to be undertaken comprehensively and coherently with other international arrangements as well as regional trade and IP arrangements. 203. It was important to align domestic policies with rapidly changing technological trends in the global economy. At this stage of Uganda's path to development, it was necessary for the country to seek and receive support from the international community on the use and management of IPRs in combination with well designed government support measures that addressed domestic development needs such as the promotion and establishment of a creative and innovative domestic industry and the development of its technological base. Uganda believed that IPRs should be a tool for development and an integrated part of national policies and programmes aimed at poverty eradication. In taking the steps necessary to advance the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement, Uganda emphasized the importance of special and differential treatment, especially in terms of its explicit entitlement to maximum policy flexibility in building a sound and viable technological base for the benefit of its people. 204. Article 66.2 clearly stated that developed country Members should provide incentives to enterprises and institutions in their territories for the purpose of promoting and encouraging technology transfer to LDCs. LDCs, including Uganda, had already waited for the implementation of these promises. For countries like Uganda, technology transfer and capacity building would be very significant to transform their economies and to allow people to fully benefit from the multilateral trading system. It was therefore important that the developed country Members faithfully provide the kind of technical and financial incentives that would encourage technology transfer and development. Uganda, like other LDCs, experienced capacity constraints in this area and called on developed country Members to comply with their promises and obligations to address this issue that was critical to its development. 205. It was Uganda's expectation that developed countries would reorient their technical and financial assistance to reflect what had been presented in this Council. An evaluation and monitoring mechanism should be established in the WTO under the TRIPS Council to make sure that the LDCs' requests were responded to.