Ambassador Alfredo Suescum (Panama)

Brésil

16 OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ORGANISATIONS

528. Brazil supports the approval of the request from South Centre and CBD as permanent observers at the TRIPS Council as a matter of priority. As stated by our colleague from India, South Centre is the intergovernmental organization of developed countries that helps them combine their efforts and expertise to promote the common interests in the international arena. It has observer status in several international organizations. In the WTO, it is an observer to the Committee on Trade and Development, its first request for observer status in the TRIPS Council dates back to 1999. It would contribute to a more meaningful participation of developing countries in the TRIPS Council discussions without in any way harming the interest of other Members. 529. The CBD is an agreement ratified by as many as 196 parties. It represents a dramatic step forward in the conservation of biological diversity, fostering the sustainable use and the fair and equitable share of benefit arising from the use of genetic resources. Unlike other permanent observers, the CBD is directly implicated in a number of items of the TRIPS Council's permanent agenda. A specific item regarding the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD is part of the agenda of every TRIPS Council meeting, and those discussions could greatly benefit from the participation of the CBD Secretariat as a permanent observer. 530. Brazil reiterates its view that the decision should be taken with respect to South Centre and CBD as a matter of priority. We invite delegations to share their concerns regarding their observer status, something we have not heard up to this moment. 531. Regarding the other four requests, namely ARIPO, OAPI, GCC and EFTA, we support the ad-hoc status. We are looking for a holistic solution for the outstanding requests of all organizations.

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

83. The Chairman indicated that there remained 13 pending requests for observer status in the TRIPS Council by intergovernmental organizations. The updated list was contained in document IP/C/W/52/Rev.13. Delegations had been informed at the Council's meeting in November 2016 that the Secretariat had made available the information that had been provided by all 13 intergovernmental organizations concerned on the Members' website. 3 It covered the nature of their respective work and the reasons for their interest in observer status. This should help delegations better understand each of the pending requests.

84. At the Council's meetings in 2016, 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, the African Intellectual Property Organization, the Cooperation Council of the Arab States of the Gulf, and the European Free Trade Association. These four organisations currently enjoyed an ad hoc observer status on a meeting-to-meeting basis.

85. The previous Chair had repeatedly urged Members to assess the pending requests on their own merits, in particular the competence and interest that the requesting entity had in matters dealt with by the TRIPS Council.

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

87. The Chairman suggested that, since it was not possible to reach an agreement to grant permanent observer status to ARIPO, OAPI, GCC and EFTA, the Council again invite these four organizations to attend its next meeting 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.

88. The Council so agreed.

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

IP/C/M/85, IP/C/M/85/Add.1