BACK TO MAIN  |  ONLINE BOOKSTORE  |  HOW TO ORDER

LMG calls for principles and procedures for Ministerial Conferences

Geneva, 12 May (Chakravarthi Raghavan) - The General Council of the World Trade Organization, at its formal meeting this week, has been asked by a group of developing countries, members of the Like-Minded Group, to agree on basic principles and procedures to govern the preparatory process and the conduct of the Ministerial Conferences of the WTO, so as to ensure that they are transparent, inclusive and predictable.

The proposed principles and procedures will end the kind of shenanigans and abuse of procedures staged at the 4th ministerial conference - starting with the adoption of the agenda at the ceremonial opening sessions, the use of named and unnamed ‘facilitators’ to create an artificial consensus on the Ministerial declaration and work programme and ending with the consultations among a small number of invited delegations in the Presidential suite, with ministers present asked to agree to formulations and drafts on new issues that were brought up only there at the last moment.

The proposal, in the form of a communication, has been tabled by India on behalf of Cuba, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, Honduras, India, Indonesia, Jamaica, Kenya, Malaysia, Mauritius, Pakistan, Sri Lanka, Tanzania, Uganda and Zimbabwe.

The LMG members have suggested that Ministerial Conferences should be held in Geneva, rather than in host countries outside, which increases the costs for members to participate, apart from the inconveniences caused.

The membership should also review the evolving tendency of holding the ministerial conference, with primary focus on launching or reviewing of negotiations.

The proposals and procedures are so basic to any intergovernmental and international organizations that the very fact that delegations have now to formally propose putting into place such procedures is perhaps the best commentary on the state of the rules-based World Trade Organization.

In the runup to Doha, the Chairman of the General Council (Mr. Stuart Harbinson of Hong Kong China and the Director-General Mike Moore) announced that they would send their drafts of the Ministerial Declaration and other drafts (for the consideration of and adoption by Ministers) directly to the Ministerial Conference, and claimed they could do so under their own authority.

At a press briefing when asked to cite the particular rule of the rules-based WTO that provided such an authority, the WTO’s chief spokesman, Keith Rockwell, could not cite any rule, but said that the secretariat’s research showed there was “a degree of inconsistency” in the procedures about the right of Chair and the DG to act thus and that ‘flexibility’ was the watchword.

At Doha itself, at the ceremonial opening session, when the Emir of Qatar was in the Chair opening the conference, the Agenda of the Conference was placed before the session and declared adopted (and at the time of adoption, several delegations said they had not even been provided a copy of the draft agenda), and Harbinson and Moore were also enabled to table their drafts.

The ceremonial nature of the meeting made it impossible for any of the delegates to challenge the Emir, as the head of the host country, and the procedure.

Later at the first plenary meeting of the Heads of Delegations, when India and other ministers raised their flags to challenge the procedures adopted, the chair of the conference, the Trade Minister of Qatar whose attention was drawn by Moore (sitting by his side) to the ministers wishing to be recognized, “We don’t give them the time”.

In their joint communication, 15 LMG countries said that since 1995, four ministerial conferences had been held and the procedures adopted both at the preparatory process in Geneva and at the Ministerial Conference itself, had been different.

The added: “This uncertainty in the process makes it difficult for many members to prepare themselves for the Conference. Some basic principles and procedures for this Member-driven organization need to be agreed upon, so that both the preparatory process and the conduct of the Ministerial conference are transparent, inclusive and predictable.”

In the preparatory process at Geneva, the countries said, the aim should be to finalize the agenda for the Ministerial Conference and a broad work programme resulting from the agenda, to be proposed for consideration of the Ministerial Conference. The Geneva process should aim at finalizing a draft ministerial declaration, reflecting the priorities and interests of the entire membership.

As guiding elements for the preparatory process, the LMG members proposed that

·        all consultations should be transparent and open-ended, and the preparatory process conducted under the close supervision of the General Council and chair by the General Council chair. Any consultations or meetings held outside this process are not to be part of the formal preparatory process, and any negotiating procedures to be adopted should be approved by Members by consensus at formal meetings.

·        the draft agenda should be drawn up only after Members have been given an opportunity to express their views, and once the agenda and parameters are agreed upon, changes may be permitted only if so decided by the entire membership.

·        there should be frequent formal meetings of the General Council to take stock of the progress in the preparatory work and ministers should be drawn up of such meetings.

This would help members who have no delegations at Geneva and give an indication of the status of work to capital-based officials. And given difficulties of non-Geneva based members to send representatives for such meetings, a formal meeting of the General Council should be scheduled just before or after the Geneva week, for such delegations.

·        there should be sufficient time for delegations to consider documents to facilitate proper consideration by and consultation with capitals.

·        the language of the draft ministerial declaration should be clear and unambiguous, and the draft should be based on consensus. Where this is not possible, the differences should be fully and appropriately reflected in the draft - either through listing the various options suggested by members or by the chairperson reflecting the different positions on issues.

“If the majority of the membership has strong opposition to the inclusion of any issue in the draft ministerial declaration, then such an issue should not be included in the draft declaration.”

·        the work on the declaration should be completed in Geneva to the maximum extent possible. Only those issues listed as options or where the chairperson has reflected different positions should be left for the ministers to deliberate and decide at the ministerial conference.

·        “A draft ministerial declaration can only be forwarded to the Ministerial Conference by the General Council upon consensus to do so.”

·        In the preparatory process for the Ministerial Conference, the Director-General and the WTO secretariat “should remain impartial” on the specific issues being considered in the ministerial declaration.

·        Sectoral work by working groups is an effective way for expediting resolution of pending issues. The number, structure and chairpersons/facilitators for such working groups should be decided by the General Council in Geneva, in advance of the Ministerial Conference, through consultations among all Members.

In terms of the process at the Ministerial Conference, the LMG proposed that

·        the agenda for the conference should not be adopted at the ceremonial opening session, but at the first formal plenary session immediately thereafter.

·        a Committee of the Whole (COW) should be established at all Ministerial Conferences and this Committee should be the main forum for decision-making, and all meetings of the COW should be formal.

·        the chairpersons including facilitators who would conduct consultations and meetings on specific subjects at the Ministerial Conference should be identified by consensus in the preparatory process in Geneva, through consultations among all Members, and such persons should be persons from Members that do not have a direct interest in the subject assigned for consultations.

·        the consultations by chairperson/facilitator should be at open-ended meetings only. The chairperson/facilitator could convene meetings of proponents and opponents on the subject assigned, and any other interested member should be free to join such meetings. The schedule of each meeting shall be announced at least a few hours before the meeting.

·        consultations should be transparent, inclusive and all members should be given equal opportunity to express their views. Chairpersons/facilitators should report to the COW periodically and in a substantive way.

·        all negotiating texts and draft decisions should be introduced only in open-ended meetings.

·        late night meetings and marathon negotiating sessions should be avoided.

·        the language of the declaration should be clear and unambiguous. All drafts shall be considered and finalised in a drafting committee to be appointed for that purpose by all members and the membership should be open to all members.

·        the secretariat and the DG of the WTO as well as all chairpersons/facilitators should assume a neutral/impartial and objective role, and they shall not express views explicitly or otherwise on specific issues being discussed in the Ministerial Conference. Specific rules to conduct the work of the Chairs and Vice-Chairs of the Ministerial Conference should be elaborated.

·        Discussions at the Ministerial Conference on the draft ministerial declaration should focus on issues not agreed upon in the Geneva process and various alternate texts developed at Geneva.

·        any new draft on specific issues should be circulated to all members well in advance so that members have sufficient time to consider them. To ensure transparency in the negotiating process, any draft on specific issues should clearly indicate the member or members suggesting the draft.

·        the duration of the Ministerial Conferences should be in accordance with the scheduled agreed upon in Geneva, as many delegations make their travel and accommodation arrangements accordingly. If an extension is required, it shall be formally approved through consensus.

[At Doha, the conference was extended by the chair without any formal decision of the Conference, and the convening of the final plenary was put off for a time - after the departure of the Qatari airways special flights that brought several of the ministers, including from the least developed countries, to Doha for the conference.]

·        In various meetings, formal as well as informal, during the Ministerial Conference, arrangements should be made for Ministers to be accompanied by at least two officers. It is the right of any Member to designate its representative and in this connection the Heads of Delegations has the discretion to mandate his/her officials to speak on his/her behalf.

[At Doha in the ‘green room’ in the Presidential suite, some of the African ministers who were allowed to attend (after their protests) were told they could not bring even their ambassadors as advisors to sit with them, while some of the leading countries had two or three advisors inside and a host of lawyers and others just outside to enable consultations.]

The issue of the venue of Ministerial Conferences, the LMG pointed out, had been discussed during the Uruguay Round itself, when it was felt that the Conference should be held in the WTO itself. Apart from convenience, this would result in savings in costs and efforts.

“Many developing countries find it prohibitively expensive to participate in the Conference,” the LMG said, adding: “There could be a case for having all the future Ministerial Conferences after Mexico in Geneva itself.”

The LMG also said that since Ministerial Conferences are to be held at least once every two years, and in terms of para one of Article IV of the Marrakesh agreement, “it is strongly recommended that Members review the evolving tendency of holding Ministerial Conferences that are primarily focussed on the launching or review of negotiations.”  - SUNS5117

[c] 2002, SUNS - All rights reserved. May not be reproduced, reprinted or posted to any system or service without specific permission from SUNS. This limitation includes incorporation into a database, distribution via Usenet News, bulletin board systems, mailing lists, print media or broadcast. For information about reproduction or multi-user subscriptions please contact: suns@igc.org

 


BACK TO MAIN  |  ONLINE BOOKSTORE  |  HOW TO ORDER