Rejoinder from the Ministry of Commerce and Industry, to the article “MC12 over, its ‘gains’ for the developed world” published on July 25, 2022.
Dear sir,
Please refer to the above-mentioned article in your paper. The article is loaded with factual errors, misrepresentations and mis imputations of references and seems to have made a deliberate attempt to paint a negative picture of what is now acknowledged as best feasible acceptable outcome for India as well as the global community in unprecedented times. India has not only been able to protect its key interests but also been credited with bringing many issues to a consensus at WTO.
India has been successful in not only defending and safeguarding interests of its own people but also great many developing countries in the field of Agriculture, Fisheries, E-Commerce etc., which have complex negotiations. India also helped in building consensus in many key areas of negotiations at the WTO Ministerial Conference in Geneva.
It is requested that point-by-point rebuttal of the Article be published in the paper immediately and negative perception about the WTO outcomes for India be corrected.
Following is the point-wise rebuttal
1. Architecture of the WTO
The article mentions that the EU sought to make fundamental changes to the institutional architecture of the WTO and to give a formal role to private sector in WTO processes and both these objectives are secured. This is total mis representation of facts.
At no place there is a mention of private sector getting any role in the reform of the WTO. Para 12 of the Outcome Document (OD) mentions only about the importance of strengthened collaboration and cooperation with other intergovernmental organisations and other relevant stakeholders that have responsibilities related to those of the WTO.
The paragraph on WTO reform in the OD (Para 3) takes care of India’s concerns, i.e., while reaffirming the foundational principles of the WTO, the reform process will be conducted in the General Council and its subsidiary bodies. It reconfirms that the process will be member-driven, open, transparent, inclusive, and must address the interests of all Members, including development issues.
The OD mentions that the Members resolve to strengthen the rules-based, nondiscriminatory, open, fair, inclusive, equitable and transparent multilateral trading system with the WTO at its core.
2. Agriculture
The article mentions that India failed to get an outcome on a permanent solution to the issue of public stockholding for food security purposes (PSH) despite support of more than 80 countries. This is an outright erroneous interpretation .
How its in India’s favour
Indian interests and India’s public stockholding programmes continue to be protected by the mechanism of ‘peace clause’ which is available till a permanent solution is reached. India accordingly continues to seek permanent solution for public stockholding but at the same time ensuring that our interests in overall agriculture areas are protected. Food security is a priority issue for India. There was no consensus on the issue of PSH and till a consensus is reached, no decision is final at WTO
3. Fisheries
The Fisheries Subsidies Agreement at the recently concluded World Trade Organization (WTO) Ministerial meeting will prohibit subsidies from being provided for Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated (IUU) fishing and overfished stocks. One fails to understand, how this clause is being interpreted as negative outcome for India by the author.
How its in India’s favour
The Agreement addresses the global menace of IUU fishing, which is running into several billions of dollars and deprives coastal nations like India of fisheries resources, thereby it would significantly aid in improving the livelihoods of traditional fishing communities that depend on fisheries. The Agreement also prohibits providing subsidies for fishing on high seas, which are outside the jurisdiction of coastal countries and Regional Fisheries Management Organizations/ Arrangements (RFMO/As). Big Developed nations were exploiting high seas for fishing. They would no longer be having subsidies and this is good for nations like India.
Further, under the Special and Differential Treatment (S&DT), Developing Countries and Least Developed Countries (LDCs) have been allowed a transition period of two years after the Agreement’s entry into force. Under this Agreement, no prohibition has been imposed on a WTO Member to grant or maintain subsidies to rebuild the overfished stocks to a biologically sustainable level. India has successfully negotiated a two-year transition period from the date of entry into force of the Agreement for developing countries, including least developed countries within their EEZ, to put in place the remedial conservation and management measures for recovery of overfished stocks and to calibrate the actions on IUU fishing within its EEZ to safeguard the interest of fishermen community.
4.TRIPS waiver
How its in favour of India and the developing world
This too is being widely credited to India for getting a relief for the developing world and bringing fairness and equity in health care.
In October 2020, India and South Africa submitted a proposal for a waiver from certain provisions of the TRIPS Agreement for the prevention, treatment and containment of Covid-19 to the WTO TRIPS Council.
Favourable and amenable decisions on this matter were taken during the 12th Ministerial Conference of the WTO for developing countries. The key features of the outcome of the TRIPS waiver are the following. It covers patents for producing and supplying vaccines needed to address the Covid-19 pandemic. Some of the critical demands of India that this Decision be extended to Covid-19 diagnostics and therapeutics and the applicability of this Decision for five years have been accepted. India led a global deal on vaccines which may help poor and developing countries get better vaccine access, availability and affordability. India’s stand was eventually supported by more than 120 Members of the WTO.
5. E-Commerce
How its in favour of India and the developing world
India not only safeguarded its own interest but also championed the interests of most of the other countries at WTO.
On the issue of “Moratorium on custom duties on electronic transmissions” the outcome is in line with the feedback from our industry which was to get e-commerce moratorium extended and to accelerate work under the work program to get a proper definition. Further it was emphasized that those seeking continuation of the moratorium need to place more evidence in support of it, failing which any further extension of moratorium may not be possible.
During MC12, India argued that growth of global e-commerce has been uneven. India stressed that increasing participation of developing countries in global e-commerce continues to be a challenge and that there has been no comprehensive assessment of the developmental aspects of global e-commerce under the Work Program on Electronic Commerce (WPEC). This is reflected in the final decision through mention of focus on development dimension. At MC12, the membership agreed to reinvigorate the work under the WPEC, based on the existing mandate and particularly in line with its development dimension.
6. Environment
The Article says that EU has managed to create a window to pursue negotiations under environment. This is an incorrect interpretation, for inter alia the following reasons:
i. The mandate in the OD of MC12 is that trade related issues in environment would be discussed in the Committee of Trade and Environment (CTE) which is a WTO body and which is a discussion forum and not negotiating forum.
ii. India does not support mainstreaming of environment including climate change issues into the WTO agenda, as these issues are being more suitably dealt with under the Multilateral Environmental Frameworks. There is a need to preserve policy space for Members to define their paths towards sustainable development based on their level of development, national circumstances and priorities. India agreed to the language in the MC12 OD that is in line with the existing WTO mandate reflected in the Preamble of the Marrakesh Agreement, past Ministerial Declarations and the scope of work of relevant WTO body.
iii. Para (14) agreed in the MC12 OD refers to:
• Recognizing global environmental challenges including climate change.
• Noting the importance of the multilateral trading system to promote the UN 2030 Agenda and its Sustainable Development Goals in its economic, social and environmental dimensions, in so far as they related to the WTO mandates and are consistent with the respective needs and concerns of member countries at different levels of economic development.
• Reaffirming the importance of providing relevant support to developing countries to achieve sustainable development
• Noting the role of WTO’s CTE as a forum dedicated to dialogue among members on the relationship between trade measures and environment measures iv. The language agreed reflects that importance of the multilateral trading system (MTS) to promote UN 2030 Agenda and its SDGs is limited to the extent it relates to the WTO mandates which is in line with the language in the Nairobi Ministerial Declaration, 2015*. Further, it refers to the role of the MTS in this regard needs to be consistent with the respective needs and concerns of members at different levels of economic development and the importance of relevant support for developing countries which is borrowed from the Preamble of the Marrakesh Agreement. Moreover, in line with the mandate of WTO’s Committee on Trade and Environment, its role was noted as a standing forum for a dialogue among members on the relationship between trade measures and environment measures.
*Nairobi Ministerial Declaration, 2015 “We recognize the role the WTO can play in contributing towards achievement of the 2030 Sustainable Development Goals, in so far as they relate to the WTO mandate, and bearing in mind the authority of the WTO Ministerial Conference.”
