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

Ambassador Mothusi Palai (Botswana)
Bangladesh en nombre de Países menos adelantados
363. Let me first speak on behalf of the LDC group. The LDCs are pleased to note that we are now at the twelfth annual review of Article 66.2 of the TRIPs Agreement, in line with the Decision adopted by Ministers in Doha in 2001. 364. But shall we pause and ask why are we here? Article 66, in particular is the centre of the delicate balance that was struck in the TRIPS Agreement. Those who came before us in Uruguay, concluded this agreement bearing that point in mind. You will recall that in a couple of days, we shall be celebrating another anniversary of the WTO Agreements: however, anniversary after anniversary we are still standing still with respect to building a sound and viable technological base. The faithful implementation of the obligations under Article 66.2 would respond to that objective and purpose for which it was crafted. 365. That said, we would like to thank those developed countries that have continued to provide reports to the TRIPS Council on incentives they have provided to their enterprises and institutions in their territories, with a view to promoting and encouraging transfer of technology to LDCs, in order to enable our countries to create a sound and viable technological base. 366. It ought to be acknowledged that we have come a long way in this process and LDCs are pleased to note the improvements made by some delegations to their reports. As is known to all, the purpose of this review is threefold: first, to provide Members with an opportunity to pose questions in relation to the information submitted and request additional information; second, to discuss the effectiveness of the incentives provided in promoting and encouraging technology transfer to LDCs in order to enable them to create a sound and viable technological base; and third, to consider any points relating to the operation of the reporting procedure established by the Decision. 367. It is important to recall that we had a frank exchange of views during the workshop held yesterday, 27 October 2014 on this subject. There is common understanding among all those that have participated in this process that reports not only have to be submitted, but their format has to be such that the information is digestible to the recipients of such support. 368. We also observed that some Members had made an effort to follow the structure that we had proposed in our submission IP/C/W/561, to make the reporting system structured and simple. Others are yet to get there. 369. The reports are very informative and helpful to understand the programmes Members have been offering to us. We got the reports very recently and had little time for an in-depth analysis. However, on a preliminary reading, we found some to be difficult to sort out the elements as envisaged in the TRIPS Council decision contained in IP/C/28. 370. Most importantly, there was extremely limited indication or specific mention of the "incentive regime" that Members have put in place. Nonetheless, we raised some questions for clarification. We hope Members will respond to them in writing. 371. Finally, a common understanding on what constitutes technology transfer still eludes us. Developed countries have elected a very broad view of what technology transfer means. Contrary to the understanding of the LDCs, and in fact, shared understanding by our Uruguay round negotiators. Our view is for the Chair to facilitate a process to address this gap with a view to harmonization of this understanding.
The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matter at its next meeting.
10.1. The Chairman recalled that, at its meeting in February 2003, the Council had adopted a decision on the "Implementation of Article 66.2 of the TRIPS Agreement". Paragraph 1 of the Decision provided that developed country Members shall submit annually reports on actions taken or planned in pursuance of their commitments under Article 66.2. To this end, they were to provide new detailed reports every third year and, in the intervening years, provide updates to their most recent reports. These reports were to be submitted prior to the last Council meeting scheduled for the year in question.

10.2. The fourth set of detailed annual reports under the Decision had been presented to the Council's meeting in November 2012. At its meeting in June 2014, the Council had requested developed country Members to submit a second set of updates to these reports for the present meeting. The Secretariat had issued on 24 July an airgram (WTO/AIR/4336) to remind developed country Members of this request.

10.3. To date, the Council had received updates to the annual reports from the following developed country Members: Australia; Japan; New Zealand; Canada; Norway; Switzerland, as well as the United States. This documentation was circulated in document IP/C/W/602 and addenda. The report submitted by the European Union and individual member States, namely Austria; Belgium; Denmark; Estonia; Finland; France; Ireland; Luxemburg; the Netherlands; Slovakia; Spain; Sweden and the United Kingdom, had been made available as a room document on documents online and would also be circulated as an addendum to document IP/C/W/602.

10.4. The Chairman recognized that some of the information had been received only very recently, and most of it was, so far, available only in its original language. Therefore, he suggested that Members make further comments on the information at the next TRIPS Council's meeting.

10.5. He said that, for the seventh year in a row, the Secretariat had organized, at the request by LDC Members, a workshop on transfer of technology under Article 66.2 back-to-back to with the Council's end-of-year meeting on 27 October 2014. It had again brought together LDC and developed country experts to discuss this matter at a very practical level, building on the earlier workshops. There had been again a constructive exchange of views which was useful to both LDC and developed country delegations.

10.6. The discussions had also covered the reporting format that could be used by developed country Members in order to make the information provided more accessible. He recalled that, at the tenth review, Haiti on behalf of the LDC Group requested that the Council adopt the proposed format for reports submitted by developed country Members under Article 66.2 contained in a communication submitted by Angola on behalf of the LDC Group prior to the ninth review and circulated in document IP/C/W/561. The Secretariat had informed the Council a number of times of its work to develop an information management tool for this purpose that would facilitate the submission, processing and circulation of information on available incentives. One thing that was being explored was how the substantive concerns could be reflected in any such new tools. This had been considered at the Workshop.

10.7. In order to record the questions posed to reporting developed country Members on the occasion of the previous Workshop held on 9 October 2013, a compilation of these questions had been circulated as a room document on documents online at the request of the LDC Group.

10.8. The representatives of Australia; the European Union; New Zealand; Nepal; the United States; Bangladesh on behalf of the LDC Group and Bangladesh took the floor.

10.9. The Chairman thanked the Secretariat for organizing once more the Workshop and the delegations concerned for their constructive contributions at the Workshop; and indicated that the Council would provide an opportunity, at the next meeting, for Members to make further comments on the information submitted for this meeting that they might not yet have been able to study.

10.10. The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matter at its next meeting.

IP/C/M/77, IP/C/M/77/Add.1