Ambassador Mero (United Republic of Tanzania)

Brésil

15 Observer Status for International Intergovernmental Organizations

720. I would like to state our official position on this matter of observers based on the instructions of the capital which I am representing here today. Brazil's position on this topic, as we listened five minutes ago, is well-known. We support the approval of the request from the South Centre and the CBD Secretariat as permanent observers of the TRIPS Council as a matter of priority. 721. The South Centre is the intergovernmental organization that helps developing countries combine their efforts and expertise to promote their common interest in the international agenda. As we all know, it was established by an intergovernmental agreement in 1995. The South Centre is one of those organizations that helps mitigate the asymmetry in access to qualified human resources between country members. It is an independent intergovernmental think tank created to analyse the specific problems of developing countries and encourage them to value and share their common experience and provide intellectual and policy support for them to act collectively and individually. We do not, in developing countries, always count on the high-level expertise at the necessary numbers to address all complex issues of international trade and particularly IP with all its ramifications. It is a matter of justice to ensure that, to the extent possible, all WTO Members enjoy a level playing field as far as IP expertise is concerned. 722. Brazil, in its participation in the TRIPS Council and in all other multinational fora, is motivated by a spirt of fairness and dialogue – not of confrontation. Nothing in our experience shows that the South Centre is any different. The South Centre has an observer status in several international organizations, in the WTO, as you know, it is an observer to the Committee on Trade and Development and as my colleague, Rodrigo, just mentioned here, the first request of observer status of the South Centre of the TRIPS Council dates back to 1999. 723. On the South Centre my final words are a question. What are we afraid of? The South Centre would be an observer not a policy setter. It would contribute to a more meaningful participation of developing countries in TRIPS Council discussions without in any way harming the interests of other Members. 724. With your permission a few words about the CBD. The Convention on Biological Diversity ratified by as many as 196 countries represents a dramatic step forward in the conservation of biological diversity, the sustainable use of its components and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from the use of genetic resources. My country is proud to have played a key role, as we all know, when the CBD was adopted at the Nairobi Conference in May 1992 and was then opened for signatures for the first time at the Rio Earth Summit in June of the same year. 725. In every TRIPS Council meeting, Members discuss the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD. It is our understanding that discussions in this Body could greatly benefit from the participation of the CBD Secretariat as an observer. Unlike other permanent observers, the CBD is directly implicated as we just saw in a number of items on the TRIPS Council's agenda. 726. In summing up, Brazil reiterates its view that the decision should be made regarding the South Centre and the CBD Secretariat as a matter of priority.

The Council so agreed.

80. The Chairman recalled that there remained 13 pending requests for observer status in the TRIPS Council by other intergovernmental organizations. The updated list was contained in document IP/C/W/52/Rev.13. At the Council's meetings in March and June 2016, and in line with positions taken at earlier meetings, a number of interested delegations had reiterated their support for granting permanent observer status to the South Centre, the CBD Secretariat and the International Vaccine Institute. Other delegations had signalled that they could agree to grant permanent observer status to the African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO), the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI), the Cooperation Council of the Arab States of the Gulf (GCC), and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA). These four organisations currently enjoyed an ad hoc observer status on a meeting-to-meeting basis. He noted that ARIPO and the GCC were represented by high level officials at the meeting.

81. While there had been positive signals at the meeting in June 2016 indicating that the issues could be resolved through consultations among delegations, it had finally been not possible to make progress on these pending requests. Members had undertaken to further consult with their respective capitals. The Council had agreed to revert to this matter at this meeting under the agenda item on "Observer Status" and had asked the Chairman to continue his consultations on the pending requests for observer status with a view to reaching an agreement at this meeting.

82. The Chairman said that he had therefore taken up the matter at the informal meeting on 1 November. He had invited Members once more to refrain from linking requests for observer status. These should be assessed on their own merits, in particular the competence and interest that the requesting entity had in matters dealt with by the TRIPS Council. However, no progress had been signalled at that meeting.

83. To facilitate the consideration of the pending requests, he informed Members that, since the Council's meeting in June 2016, the Secretariat had made available on the Members' website the information provided by all 13 international intergovernmental organizations that had requested observer status. The information covered the nature of their respective work and the reasons for their interest in observer status. This should help Members better understand each request.

84. In line with the approach taken at the Council's meeting in June 2016, he said that he would like to facilitate another round of frank exchange of views among Members and suggested that the Council continue its session in informal mode. This should allow Members to take a fresh look at many pending requests and to make progress.

85. The Chairman summarized the informal discussion and noted that there had been objection to each of the pending requests among Members. Therefore, it had not been possible to make progress on any of them, but Member had undertaken to further consult with their respective capitals. He suggested that the Council agree to request him to continue his consultations on the pending requests for observer status.

86. The representatives of Nigeria on behalf of the African Group, Brazil, the United States, India, Ecuador, Egypt, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, China, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, Indonesia, Bangladesh, Cuba and Pakistan took the floor.

87. The Council took note of the Chairman's summary and of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matter at its next meeting.

88. The Chairman said that since it had not been possible to reach an agreement to grant permanent observer status to ARIPO, OAPI, GCC and EFTA, he suggested that the Council invite these four organizations to attend its next meeting again on an ad hoc basis. This was in line with the agreement reached at the Council's meetings in June 2010 and November 2012 to grant them ad hoc observer status on a meeting-by-meeting basis.

89. The Council so agreed.

IP/C/M/83, IP/C/M/83/Add.1