|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Jun23/14) Washington DC, 22 Jun (D. Ravi Kanth) — The chair of the World Trade Organization’s General Council (GC), Ambassador Athaliah Lesiba Molokomme of Botswana, said on 20 June that the retreat held on 16 June provided an “impetus to WTO reform work”, hoping that it would clarify the roadmap towards the WTO’s 13th ministerial conference (MC13), to be held in Abu Dhabi in February 2024. But much clarity on the roadmap will only emerge if reforms in the other two pillars – the negotiating function and the reform of the dispute settlement system (DSS), especially the restoration of the two-tier DSS with the Appellate Body at its helm – proceed at the same pace as the institutional issues and the strengthening of the WTO committees and the General Council, said people who took part in the retreat. The industrialized countries including the United States and the European Union, which are apparently pushing for bold and brisk reforms, must also show the same spirit when it comes to the reform of the dispute settlement system, said people, who asked not to be identified. Clearly, at present, there are asymmetries in the progress of the WTO reforms as envisaged in the Outcome Document issued by trade ministers at the WTO’s 12th ministerial conference (MC12) held in June last year. Unless there is a holistic effort by all members, the WTO reforms could fall prey to “cherry-picking” by powerful members, said people familiar with the discussions. GC CHAIR’S CONCLUSIONS In a restricted document (Job/GC/346) issued on 20 June, seen by the SUNS, the GC chair said that it is key that the General Council effectively performs its oversight and decision-making role. She said “the TNC [Trade Negotiations Committee] must utilize its oversight function to provide results-oriented momentum to ongoing negotiations,” adding that “making our meetings more meaningful is part of ensuring that the WTO remains fit for purpose.” Ambassador Molokomme assured members that she “will continue to provide detailed convening notices in the IC/TNC series indicating the topics to be taken up including matters I will raise solely for information purposes as many of you have suggested.” She said, “I will also continue the practice of holding meetings only when necessary.” In addition, the GC chair said that there seems to be “emerging convergence around the idea mentioned this morning on extending the Informal HODs (Heads of Delegations) as needed in order that Members have more detailed exchanges on other issues including Secretariat reforms and other matters.” STOCKTAKING MEETING ON 20 JULY Ambassador Molokomme said that she will convene “our Formal TNC and Informal HODs meeting on 20 July since we postponed the Senior Officials Meeting to October,” adding that “I hope this meeting will provide the opportunity for proper stocktaking and identifying issues to be taken up at the Senior Officials Meeting prior to the summer break.” “In this regard, the July GC meeting will be an important marker for achieving this clarity that will assist in focusing the Geneva process from September until senior officials meet in October,” she emphasized. She expressed confidence in the Senior Officials Meeting in October, which would provide an impetus “to our Geneva efforts to follow up on MC12 results, deliver outcomes in areas of importance to all and have further clarity on Ministerial deliberations and deliverables at MC13.” Much would depend on the Senior Officials Meeting, she said, adding that “Ministers in Abu Dhabi would be able to endorse deliverables that you would have finalized while also having a more open-ended discussion about other pressing global issues as many of you have indicated you want to take up and based on the Australian and other proposals to enhance the deliberative function.” As regards stakeholder engagement as suggested by several members, the GC chair said: “I seize the opportunity to remind you that the Secretariat, as earlier announced, is going forward with some stakeholder engagement advice to the Secretariat with Business and Civil Society Advisory Groups …” DG’S CONCLUDING REMARKS In her concluding remarks, the WTO Director-General, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, said that members “have demonstrated this in our efforts to respond to the pandemic, address supply chain bottlenecks, agriculture and food security, trade facilitation, and development initiatives, among others.” The DG said “we will continue with the coherence mandate that we have to collaborate with other international organizations.” However, there are mixed views on collaboration with external actors and even international organizations. The DG, who is facing “rough weather” over her budgetary demands and also on Secretariat reform, particularly her proposal to create some new divisions, said that she hopes that “you will also take into account our various constraints which are becoming very evident – including budget and staffing. Rest assured that the Secretariat is always committed to assisting Members, in the best possible way we can, to achieve our collective objectives.” ASSESSMENTS OF BREAKOUT SESSIONS The four facilitators of the breakout sessions provided their respective assessments. Highlighted below is the GC chair’s summary of the sessions: “1. Common themes – Breakout Session I 1. Members likewise found value in the need to improve engagement with external stakeholders in deliberations. It was pointed out that regional balance had to be taken into account and they should be chosen in an open and transparent manner without politicization. At the same time, it has been noted that this engagement should preserve the Member-driven nature of the organization and that WTO Members should be the only ones taking part in decision-making. 2. Another issue that was discussed was the role or contribution of international intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) to Members’ deliberation of the issues identified. Members found merit in bringing together WTO Members’ expertise in trade policy and the knowledge of other relevant IGOs to help develop coherent and mutually supportive approaches. Some suggestions include inviting them to thematic and informal discussions or continuing collaboration on research and analytic work as well as technical assistance and capacity building programmes. Some pointed out that work with regional organizations such as the African Union, the Inter-American Development Bank and ASEAN should be enhanced so that Members’ deliberations take account of realities on the ground. At the same time, Members again stressed the importance of preserving the Member-driven nature of the WTO and respecting the IGO’s respective competences, mandates and limitations. 3. Members also explored how to improve opportunities and mechanisms to address trade concerns and shared the desire to ensure that the deliberative function facilitates Members in effectively addressing trade concerns. In this regard, the need to effectively consider trade concerns in a solutions-oriented manner while taking account of capacity constraints and preserving the right to raise trade concerns was reiterated. 3.11. Other matters raised included the importance of transparency – which some pointed out could be better built through in-person as opposed to virtual meetings; being results-oriented and cooperating towards results; prioritization of issues and faithfulness to mandates; need for broader crosscutting discussions and balanced reach in WTO discussions and a need for a proactive interaction between Members and the Secretariat on reform by doing. 3.12. With regard to the second breakout session which addressed effective oversight and decision-making in the Ministerial Conference and the General Council and ensuring that the TNC effectively plays a supervising role of the overall conduct of negotiations – the common themes that emerged were the following: 3.13. First, the importance of ensuring the WTO’s Member-driven nature as well as transparency and inclusiveness at Ministerial Conferences and in decision-making was underscored in all breakout sessions. While concerns were raised about the use of small group configurations, Members still found utility in this – particularly in convergence building – for as long as the groups were representative of the Membership, transparency was ensured and that all 164 Members had the right to participate in the decision-making process. 3.14. The question of the periodicity of holding Ministerial Conferences was also discussed. Views were shared on the idea of having annual Ministerial Conferences – with merit seen on making the meeting more business-like and taking off pressure given the increased frequency. At the same time, concerns were expressed about capacity constraints, scheduling conflicts with other annual Ministerial meetings and overloading Ministers’ calendars. 3.15. Several delegations noted that recent Ministerial Conferences had come with a lot of pressure to deliver big outcomes and noted that such Conferences could also simply be an opportunity for further high-level deliberative discussions. In this context, some delegations also mentioned the various proposals to review the regularity and frequency of Ministerial Conferences. Members suggested having deeper policy engagement at Ministerial Conferences on emerging policy issues facing the global trade regime on a thematic basis. Members particularly welcomed the idea of using Ministerial Conferences as a platform for Ministers to have frank, solutions-oriented conversations on issues that directly affect their constituencies. Some considerations noted were (i) ensuring that the interests of all WTO Members are taken into account, (ii) the need for sufficient preparations both in Geneva and in capitals so that Ministers can meaningfully engage, and (iii) that the process to lay down such Ministerial dialogues would be transparent, inclusive and Member-driven. 3.16 Common themes – Breakout Session II 3.17. To ensure productive Ministerial Conferences, Members highlighted the importance of engaging capital-based officials in Geneva work in the lead up to a Ministerial Conference including Vice Ministers and Senior Officials. In this regard, reference was made to the Senior Officials Meeting in October – with some suggesting having another one a few days before a Ministerial Conference. Members welcomed the planned Senior Officials’ meeting and recalled the importance of ensuring a transparent, inclusive, and predictable preparatory process vis-a-vis MC13. In this regard, a clear agenda should be set and any texts to be considered by Vice Ministers should be shared well in advance, and remaining differences on the draft texts clearly identified. Concluding work in Geneva, wherever possible, to ensure that Ministers play their decision-making role rather than negotiating technical issues during Ministerial Conferences was also emphasized. 3.18. The importance of having certainty on the Ministerial Conference agenda was also underscored. One point that emerged in the discussions in some groups was the possibility to introduce an annotated agenda for Ministerial Conferences. This annotated agenda should not only list matters that are to be taken up by Ministers but should also indicate the expected outcomes or actions to be taken. It was also noted that long-standing and/or unresolved issues should not be forgotten. In this regard, delegations discussed the prioritization of issues, as well as the potential bundling of matters to ensure a focused and output-oriented approach. 3.19. In terms of “lessons learned”, from past Ministerial Conferences, the importance of better communication with all Members was underscored. While delegations recognized the need for meetings in various configurations and formats, including the “Green Room”-type meetings, they stressed that more ought to be done to ensure transparency and inclusivity. Several specific suggestions were made: (i) the inclusion of regional group coordinators or a representative group of Members from the various regions should be ensured, (ii) ensuring sufficient time for group coordinators/representatives to consult constituencies on the informal, small group processes, and (iii) providing ample time for the full membership to review any draft texts/outcomes that emerge from a small group meeting before they are put for decision, so as to ensure that consensus decision-making is upheld. Members also noted that, more generally, it may be useful to review what type of issues are taken up in Green Room-type meetings and how it is decided that an issue/matter is the focus of a Green Room-type meeting. 3.20. Members also mentioned the utility of digital tools – such as an alert app for meetings and documentation. Another example was to use the digital infrastructure to ensure inclusivity – and to allow for listening mode online where physical participation is limited in numbers. Another point on inclusivity related to extending the Ministerial Conference. If a Conference has to be extended, sufficient notice should be afforded to delegations to adjust Ministers’ agendas – and with regard to LDCs, their funding should be also extended automatically to ensure full participation and inclusivity. 3.21. In this regard and taking into account the organizational structure of the WTO, it was also noted that Members should reinvigorate decision-making in the General Council – in the intervals between meetings of Ministerial Conferences. The importance and utility of implementing bottom-up approaches was noted – that is, starting work and discussions in the relevant technical bodies with a view to forwarding matters to the General Council only once they were mature and ready for decision. In recent years, the General Council has been frequently used as a forum for first readings/exchanges on various proposals, including of a technical nature (“top-down approach”) – not always conducive for decision-making. Enabling more open, frank, and free-flowing engagement in the General Council and improving its agenda setting and time management to (i) effectively take action, as appropriate, and (ii) provide political direction was also raised. It was further underscored that matters should be taken up first in technical committees and councils before they are brought before the General Council, to ensure a bottom-up approach. In addition, it should be avoided to place items on the agenda that have already been discussed repeatedly but where there were no developments to report. 3.22. As General Council Chairperson, I would like to recall that the General Council is also reforming by doing and has put in place some measures to improve its functioning such as timing of interventions; an overall calendar of meetings; and will soon start testing an e-agenda for General Council meetings. Efforts are also being made to further speed up the production of minutes and let me stress in this regard, that given the complexity and length of General Council meetings, the timely submission of copies of Member’ statements is essential. Let me also take this opportunity to remind delegations about the General Council ePortal, which is on the WTO’s public website. It lists all matters that have been taken up in General Council meetings since 1995 by calendar year. Each matter includes links to relevant documents, minutes of meetings and, where applicable, decisions adopted by the General Council. This is a useful tool both for Members and the public at large. 3.23. On the Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC), Members noted the importance of effective engagement with the Director-General, including as TNC Chairperson, and with the Membership on negotiations and other important matters in TNC/HODs meetings. Ensuring that Members can have the frank conversations necessary to provide impetus to ongoing multilateral negotiations and WTO work was also a shared objective in this regard. Members also recalled the distinction between the General Council and the TNC and that the latter should provide a forum for deliberative discussions, including on matters that do not have a natural home in other WTO bodies. A duplication of discussions in the GC and TNC should be avoided. Others recalled the specific mandate contained in the Doha Declaration with respect to the TNC. 3.24. Concerning the way forward, the following common trends were distilled: a. Establishing a roadmap to guide Members’ work from now until MC13. b. Appointment of facilitators or Friends of the Chairperson to assist, as appropriate, with the common emerging issues and horizontal procedural reforms. c. Having retreats, dedicated sessions, working groups or joint sessions on identified themes where the mechanism would be set in motion in July and work starting in Mid-September or Early October. The July General Council will be an important marker in this process. d. The Senior Officials Meeting in October has been repeatedly noted as another marker to endorse this deliberative roadmap – in the lead up to MC13. This would also shape the MC13 format – allowing deeper policy engagement at Ministerial Conferences on emerging policy issues facing the global trade regime on a thematic basis. 3.25. In terms of next steps, I am considering holding consultations with all interested Members before the July General Council with a view to finalizing what seems to be an emerging roadmap to MC13 on the deliberative function (proposed by the European Union). This roadmap will include the topics to be taken up, when and how the issues will be taken up. My intention is to share this roadmap at the July General Council meeting – which is scheduled for 24-25 July. 3.26. Given the time left to MC13 and the amount of work to achieve the objectives you outlined today – I hope that we start to implement the roadmap early in the fall – also as delegations prepare for the Senior Officials Meeting to be held on 23-24 October. Several of you have pointed out that this could be an occasion to endorse work undertaken and provide further political impetus as we draw closer to MC13. 3.27. The Director-General and I will also reflect further on the suggestions made regarding appointing facilitators or Friends of the Chairperson for specific topics and inform Members of any decisions by the time of the General Council.” +
|
||
