126. The representative of Venezuela referred to the work of the International Law Commission relating to the issue of the international liability of states for acts not contrary to law, in particular those resulting in transboundary damage. In his understanding, this work had not sufficiently developed to justify any conclusions as yet. In other words, even in fora established by the international community to deal specifically with these types of matters, it was not yet clear what responsibility or liability of a state for acts that were not contrary to international law should amount to. The TRIPS Agreement established minimum international standards to protect trade-related intellectual property rights. It was a particular element of the Agreement that it protected private rights in the national sphere, and these private rights could be ascertained under the enforcement provisions of the TRIPS Agreement. Non-violation nullification or impairment was a concept in international law relevant to economic and trade aspects. The minimum standards at the national level had sufficient guarantees under the TRIPS enforcement provisions. Should Members allow their nationals, as a result of losses suffered in their territories, to use the nullification and impairment remedy, which was intended to protect Members' trade and economic rights. In his authorities' perception, there was not sufficient GATT jurisprudence or knowledge under public international law as to how to manage this concept of non-violation nullification and impairment in the area of private rights. There was a considerable lack of information on the legal side and it could be a task that would take three or four meetings or even years to consider. Moreover, practical examples were lacking. His delegation fully supported the proposal introduced by Egypt and felt that the moratorium should be extended for at least another five years.
