124. The representative of Pakistan recalled that the proposal, which his delegation had co-sponsored and which was a moderate proposal, had already been introduced by Egypt, but the discussions held so far compelled him to make two points, both of them procedural. First, while his delegation believed that the application of non-violation complaints was not relevant to the TRIPS Agreement, it was aware of the fact that there was an opposing view. Therefore, the matter should be examined in an open-minded manner, which would require an extension of the moratorium. Second, if the moratorium was allowed to lapse, his delegation was unclear whether the Council would achieve consensus on the scope and modalities within the time-period available and, in the absence of a consensus on the scope and modalities, how would Members apply this provision? His delegation was puzzled by the effectiveness of such a provision in the absence of such a consensus on the scope and modalities. Hence, he urged the demandeurs of the expiry of the moratorium to be willing to consider seriously the proposal his and other delegations had made.
