Currently released so far... 97115 / 251,287
Articles
Brazil
Sri Lanka
United Kingdom
Sweden
00. Editorial
United States
Latin America
Egypt
Jordan
Yemen
Thailand
Browse latest releases
2010/12/01
2010/12/02
2010/12/03
2010/12/04
2010/12/05
2010/12/06
2010/12/07
2010/12/08
2010/12/09
2010/12/10
2010/12/11
2010/12/12
2010/12/13
2010/12/14
2010/12/15
2010/12/16
2010/12/17
2010/12/18
2010/12/19
2010/12/20
2010/12/21
2010/12/22
2010/12/23
2010/12/25
2010/12/26
2010/12/27
2010/12/28
2010/12/29
2010/12/30
2011/01/01
2011/01/02
2011/01/04
2011/01/05
2011/01/07
2011/01/09
2011/01/11
2011/01/12
2011/01/13
2011/01/14
2011/01/15
2011/01/16
2011/01/17
2011/01/18
2011/01/19
2011/01/20
2011/01/21
2011/01/22
2011/01/23
2011/01/24
2011/01/25
2011/01/26
2011/01/27
2011/01/28
2011/01/29
2011/01/30
2011/01/31
2011/02/01
2011/02/02
2011/02/03
2011/02/04
2011/02/05
2011/02/06
2011/02/07
2011/02/08
2011/02/09
2011/02/10
2011/02/11
2011/02/12
2011/02/13
2011/02/14
2011/02/15
2011/02/16
2011/02/17
2011/02/18
2011/02/19
2011/02/20
2011/02/21
2011/02/22
2011/02/23
2011/02/24
2011/02/25
2011/02/26
2011/02/27
2011/02/28
2011/03/01
2011/03/02
2011/03/03
2011/03/04
2011/03/05
2011/03/06
2011/03/07
2011/03/08
2011/03/09
2011/03/10
2011/03/11
2011/03/13
2011/03/14
2011/03/15
2011/03/16
2011/03/17
2011/03/18
2011/03/19
2011/03/20
2011/03/21
2011/03/22
2011/03/23
2011/03/24
2011/03/25
2011/03/26
2011/03/27
2011/03/28
2011/03/29
2011/03/30
2011/03/31
2011/04/01
2011/04/02
2011/04/03
2011/04/04
2011/04/05
2011/04/06
2011/04/07
2011/04/08
2011/04/09
2011/04/10
2011/04/11
2011/04/12
2011/04/13
2011/04/14
2011/04/15
2011/04/16
2011/04/17
2011/04/18
2011/04/19
2011/04/20
2011/04/21
2011/04/22
2011/04/23
2011/04/24
2011/04/25
2011/04/26
2011/04/27
2011/04/28
2011/04/29
2011/04/30
2011/05/01
2011/05/02
2011/05/03
2011/05/04
2011/05/05
2011/05/06
2011/05/07
2011/05/09
2011/05/10
2011/05/11
2011/05/12
2011/05/13
2011/05/14
2011/05/15
2011/05/16
2011/05/17
2011/05/18
2011/05/19
2011/05/20
2011/05/21
2011/05/22
2011/05/23
2011/05/24
2011/05/25
2011/05/26
2011/05/27
2011/05/28
2011/05/29
2011/05/30
2011/05/31
2011/06/01
2011/06/02
2011/06/03
2011/06/04
2011/06/05
2011/06/06
2011/06/07
2011/06/08
2011/06/09
2011/06/10
2011/06/11
2011/06/12
2011/06/13
2011/06/14
2011/06/15
2011/06/16
2011/06/17
2011/06/18
2011/06/19
2011/06/20
2011/06/21
2011/06/22
2011/06/23
2011/06/24
2011/06/25
2011/06/26
2011/06/27
2011/06/28
2011/06/29
2011/06/30
2011/07/01
2011/07/02
2011/07/04
2011/07/05
2011/07/06
2011/07/07
2011/07/08
2011/07/10
2011/07/11
2011/07/12
2011/07/13
2011/07/14
2011/07/15
2011/07/16
2011/07/17
2011/07/18
2011/07/19
2011/07/20
2011/07/21
2011/07/22
2011/07/23
2011/07/25
2011/07/27
2011/07/28
2011/07/29
2011/07/31
2011/08/01
2011/08/02
2011/08/03
2011/08/05
2011/08/06
2011/08/07
2011/08/08
2011/08/10
2011/08/11
2011/08/12
2011/08/13
2011/08/15
2011/08/16
2011/08/17
2011/08/19
2011/08/21
2011/08/22
2011/08/23
2011/08/24
2011/08/25
Browse by creation date
Browse by origin
Embassy Athens
Embassy Asuncion
Embassy Astana
Embassy Asmara
Embassy Ashgabat
Embassy Apia
Embassy Antananarivo
Embassy Ankara
Embassy Amman
Embassy Algiers
Embassy Addis Ababa
Embassy Accra
Embassy Abuja
Embassy Abu Dhabi
Embassy Abidjan
Consulate Auckland
Consulate Amsterdam
Consulate Alexandria
Consulate Adana
American Institute Taiwan, Taipei
Embasy Bonn
Embassy Bujumbura
Embassy Buenos Aires
Embassy Budapest
Embassy Bucharest
Embassy Brussels
Embassy Bridgetown
Embassy Brazzaville
Embassy Bratislava
Embassy Brasilia
Embassy Bogota
Embassy Bishkek
Embassy Bern
Embassy Berlin
Embassy Belmopan
Embassy Belgrade
Embassy Beirut
Embassy Beijing
Embassy Banjul
Embassy Bangui
Embassy Bangkok
Embassy Bandar Seri Begawan
Embassy Bamako
Embassy Baku
Embassy Baghdad
Consulate Belfast
Consulate Barcelona
Embassy Cotonou
Embassy Copenhagen
Embassy Conakry
Embassy Colombo
Embassy Chisinau
Embassy Caracas
Embassy Canberra
Embassy Cairo
Consulate Curacao
Consulate Ciudad Juarez
Consulate Chiang Mai
Consulate Chennai
Consulate Chengdu
Consulate Casablanca
Consulate Cape Town
Consulate Calgary
Embassy Dushanbe
Embassy Dublin
Embassy Doha
Embassy Djibouti
Embassy Dili
Embassy Dhaka
Embassy Dar Es Salaam
Embassy Damascus
Embassy Dakar
DIR FSINFATC
Consulate Dusseldorf
Consulate Durban
Consulate Dubai
Consulate Dhahran
Embassy Guatemala
Embassy Grenada
Embassy Georgetown
Embassy Gaborone
Consulate Guayaquil
Consulate Guangzhou
Consulate Guadalajara
Embassy Helsinki
Embassy Harare
Embassy Hanoi
Consulate Hong Kong
Consulate Ho Chi Minh City
Consulate Hermosillo
Consulate Hamilton
Consulate Hamburg
Consulate Halifax
Embassy Kyiv
Embassy Kuwait
Embassy Kuala Lumpur
Embassy Kolonia
Embassy Kinshasa
Embassy Kingston
Embassy Kigali
Embassy Khartoum
Embassy Kathmandu
Embassy Kampala
Embassy Kabul
Consulate Krakow
Consulate Kolkata
Consulate Karachi
Consulate Kaduna
Embassy Luxembourg
Embassy Lusaka
Embassy Luanda
Embassy London
Embassy Lome
Embassy Ljubljana
Embassy Lisbon
Embassy Lima
Embassy Lilongwe
Embassy Libreville
Embassy La Paz
Consulate Leipzig
Consulate Lahore
Consulate Lagos
Mission USOSCE
Mission USNATO
Mission UNESCO
Mission Geneva
Embassy Muscat
Embassy Moscow
Embassy Montevideo
Embassy Monrovia
Embassy Mogadishu
Embassy Minsk
Embassy Mexico
Embassy Mbabane
Embassy Maseru
Embassy Maputo
Embassy Manila
Embassy Manama
Embassy Managua
Embassy Malabo
Embassy Madrid
Consulate Munich
Consulate Mumbai
Consulate Montreal
Consulate Monterrey
Consulate Milan
Consulate Merida
Consulate Melbourne
Consulate Matamoros
Consulate Marseille
Embassy Nouakchott
Embassy Nicosia
Embassy Niamey
Embassy New Delhi
Embassy Ndjamena
Embassy Nassau
Embassy Nairobi
Consulate Nuevo Laredo
Consulate Naples
Consulate Naha
Consulate Nagoya
Embassy Pristina
Embassy Pretoria
Embassy Praia
Embassy Prague
Embassy Port Of Spain
Embassy Port Moresby
Embassy Port Louis
Embassy Port Au Prince
Embassy Podgorica
Embassy Phnom Penh
Embassy Paris
Embassy Paramaribo
Embassy Panama
Consulate Ponta Delgada
Consulate Peshawar
REO Mosul
REO Kirkuk
REO Hillah
REO Basrah
Embassy Rome
Embassy Riyadh
Embassy Riga
Embassy Reykjavik
Embassy Rangoon
Embassy Rabat
Consulate Rio De Janeiro
Consulate Recife
Secretary of State
Embassy Suva
Embassy Stockholm
Embassy Sofia
Embassy Skopje
Embassy Singapore
Embassy Seoul
Embassy Sarajevo
Embassy Santo Domingo
Embassy Santiago
Embassy Sanaa
Embassy San Salvador
Embassy San Jose
Consulate Surabaya
Consulate Strasbourg
Consulate St Petersburg
Consulate Shenyang
Consulate Shanghai
Consulate Sapporo
Consulate Sao Paulo
Embassy Tunis
Embassy Tripoli
Embassy Tokyo
Embassy Tirana
Embassy The Hague
Embassy Tel Aviv
Embassy Tehran
Embassy Tegucigalpa
Embassy Tbilisi
Embassy Tashkent
Embassy Tallinn
Consulate Toronto
Consulate Tijuana
Consulate Thessaloniki
USUN New York
USMISSION USTR GENEVA
USEU Brussels
US Office Almaty
US Mission Geneva
US Mission CD Geneva
US Interests Section Havana
US Delegation, Secretary
US Delegation FEST TWO
UNVIE
UN Rome
Embassy Ulaanbaatar
Embassy Vilnius
Embassy Vientiane
Embassy Vienna
Embassy Vatican
Embassy Valletta
Consulate Vladivostok
Consulate Vancouver
Browse by tag
AF
ADANA
ASEC
AFIN
AMGT
AE
AORC
AID
AR
AO
AU
ASEAN
AGOA
AFGHANISTAN
AFFAIRS
AMED
APER
ASECARP
APEC
AEMR
AS
AA
ANET
AFLU
ABLD
AL
ASUP
AJ
APECO
AMER
ABUD
AODE
AM
AFSN
AESC
AND
AG
ALOW
AROC
AVIANFLU
ATRN
ACOA
AEGR
AMGMT
AADP
AFSI
ACABQ
APRM
AZ
AIDS
ASE
AGAO
ADCO
ABDALLAH
ARF
AIDAC
ACOTA
ASCH
AC
ASEG
AGR
ACS
AMCHAMS
AN
AMIA
ASIG
ADPM
ADB
ANARCHISTS
ALOWAR
ARM
AUC
AINF
AINT
AORG
AY
AVIAN
AMEDCASCKFLO
AK
ARSO
ARABBL
ASO
ANTITERRORISM
ARABL
AOWC
AGRICULTURE
ALJAZEERA
AMTC
AFINM
AOCR
ABER
ARR
AFPK
ASSEMBLY
ASSK
AZE
AORCYM
AINR
AGMT
AEC
ACKM
APRC
AIN
ASCC
AFPREL
ASED
APERTH
ASFC
ASECTH
AFSA
AOMS
AORCO
ANTXON
ARC
AFAF
ADIP
AIAG
AFARI
AEMED
AORL
AX
ASECAF
AOPC
ASECAFIN
AFZAL
APCS
AMB
AGUIRRE
AEMRASECCASCKFLOMARRPRELPINRAMGTJMXL
AIT
ARCH
AMEX
ALI
AQ
ATFN
AMBASSADOR
AORCD
AVIATION
ARAS
AINFCY
ACBAQ
AOPR
AREP
ALEXANDER
ATRD
AEIR
AOIC
ABLDG
ASEX
AFR
ASCE
ATRA
ASEK
AER
ALOUNI
AMCT
AVERY
APR
AMAT
AEMRS
ASPA
AFU
AMG
ATPDEA
ALL
AECL
ACAO
ASECKFRDCVISKIRFPHUMSMIGEG
AORD
AFL
AME
ADM
ASECPHUM
AGIT
ABT
ASECVE
AGUILAR
AT
ABMC
ALZUGUREN
ANGEL
ASR
ANTONIO
BMGT
BEXP
BM
BG
BL
BA
BR
BTA
BO
BY
BBSR
BLUE
BK
BF
BTIO
BELLVIEW
BE
BU
BN
BH
BD
BC
BTC
BILAT
BT
BX
BRUSSELS
BP
BB
BRPA
BUSH
BURMA
BMENA
BESP
BIT
BBG
BGD
BMEAID
BAGHDAD
BEN
BIO
BMOT
BWC
BLUNT
BURNS
BUT
BGMT
BAIO
BCW
BOEHNER
BFIF
BOL
BASHAR
BIMSTEC
BOU
BIDEN
BZ
BFIN
BTRA
BI
BHUM
BOIKO
BERARDUCCI
BOUCHAIB
BORDER
BEXPC
BTIU
BTT
BIOS
BEXB
BGPGOV
BOND
BLR
CE
CG
CH
CVR
CASC
CU
CI
CD
CO
CDG
CB
CJAN
CPAS
COM
CVIS
CMGT
CT
CENTCOM
CNARC
CTERR
COUNTER
CHIEF
CDC
CTR
CBW
COUNTRY
CLEARANCE
CY
CA
CM
CS
CWC
CN
CITES
CF
CWG
CIVS
CFIS
CASCC
CROATIA
CONS
COUNTERTERRORISM
CASA
COE
CJ
CHR
CODEL
CR
CBC
CACS
CHERTOFF
CAS
CONTROL
CONDITIONS
CONDOLEEZZA
CITEL
CV
CLINTON
CHG
CZ
CON
CTBT
CEN
CRIMES
COMMERCE
CLOK
CRISTINA
CFED
CARC
CND
CTM
CARICOM
COUNTRYCLEARANCE
CBTH
CHINA
CSW
CICTE
CJUS
CYPRUS
CW
CAMBODIA
CENSUS
CIDA
CRIME
CBG
CBE
CMGMT
CAIO
CEC
CARSON
CPCTC
CEDAW
COMESA
CVIA
CWCM
CEA
COSI
CAPC
CGEN
COPUOS
CGOPRC
COETRD
CKGR
CFE
CQ
CITT
CIC
CARIB
CVIC
CLO
CAFTA
CVISU
CHRISTOPHER
CACM
CIAT
CDB
CIS
CUL
CHAO
CNC
CL
CSEP
COMMAND
CENTER
COL
CAN
CAJC
CUIS
CONSULAR
CLMT
CIA
CBSA
CEUDA
CAC
CROS
CIO
CPUOS
CKOR
CVPR
CONG
CONTROLS
CEPTER
CVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGKIRF
CDCE
DPOL
DEMARCHE
DHS
DR
DA
DISENGAGEMENT
DEMOCRATIC
DEFENSE
DJ
DY
DARFUR
DHRF
DEA
DTRO
DPRK
DO
DARFR
DOC
DRL
DK
DOJ
DTRA
DOMESTIC
DAC
DOD
DEAX
DIEZ
DEOC
DELTAVIOLENCE
DCOM
DMINE
DRC
DCG
DPKO
DOMESTICPOLITICS
DE
DB
DOT
DEPT
DOE
DHLAKAMA
DHSX
DS
DKEM
DAO
DCM
DANIEL
DEM
DAVID
DCRM
ETRD
EAGR
ETTC
EAID
ECON
EFIN
ECIN
EINV
ELAB
EAIR
ENRG
EPET
EWWT
ECPS
EIND
EMIN
ELTN
EC
ETMIN
EUC
EZ
ET
ELECTIONS
ENVR
EU
EUN
EG
EINT
ER
ECONOMICS
ES
EMS
ENIV
EEB
EN
ECE
ECOSOC
EK
ENVIRONMENT
EFIS
EI
EWT
ENGRD
ECPSN
EXIM
EIAD
ERIN
ECPC
EDEV
ENGY
ECTRD
EPA
ESTH
ECCT
EINVECON
ENGR
ERTD
EUR
EAP
EWWC
ELTD
EL
EXIMOPIC
EXTERNAL
ETRDEC
ESCAP
ECO
EGAD
ELNT
ECONOMIC
ENV
ETRN
EIAR
EUMEM
ENRGPARMOTRASENVKGHGPGOVECONTSPLEAID
EREL
ECOM
ECONETRDEAGRJA
ETCC
ETRG
ECONOMY
EMED
ETR
ENERG
EITC
EFINOECD
EURM
EENG
ERA
EXPORT
ENRD
ECONEINVETRDEFINELABETRDKTDBPGOVOPIC
EGEN
EBRD
EVIN
ETRAD
ECOWAS
EFTA
ECONETRDBESPAR
EGOVSY
EPIN
EID
ECONENRG
EDRC
ESENV
ETT
EB
ENER
ELTNSNAR
ECHEVARRIA
ETRC
EPIT
EDUC
ESA
EFI
ENRGY
ESCI
EE
EAIDXMXAXBXFFR
EETC
ECIP
EIAID
EIVN
EBEXP
ESTN
EING
EGOV
ETRA
EPETEIND
ELAN
ETRDGK
EAIDRW
ETRDEINVECINPGOVCS
EPEC
ENVI
ELN
EAG
EPCS
EPRT
EPTED
ETRB
EUM
EAIDS
EFIC
EFINECONEAIDUNGAGM
EAIDAR
ESF
EIDN
ELAM
EDU
EV
EAIDAF
ECN
EDA
EXBS
EINTECPS
ENRGTRGYETRDBEXPBTIOSZ
EPREL
EAC
EINVEFIN
ETA
EAGER
EINDIR
ECA
ECLAC
ELAP
EITI
EUCOM
ECONEFINETRDPGOVEAGRPTERKTFNKCRMEAID
EARG
ELDIN
EINVKSCA
ENNP
EFINECONCS
EFINTS
ECCP
ETC
EAIRASECCASCID
EINN
ETRP
EAIDNI
EFQ
ECOQKPKO
EGPHUM
EBUD
ECONEINVEFINPGOVIZ
ENERGY
ELB
EINDETRD
EMI
ECONEFIN
EIB
EURN
ETRDEINVTINTCS
EIN
EFIM
ETIO
ELAINE
EMN
EATO
EWTR
EIPR
EINVETC
ETTD
ETDR
EIQ
ECONCS
EPPD
ENRGIZ
EISL
ESPINOSA
ELEC
EAIG
ESLCO
EUREM
ENTG
ERD
EINVECONSENVCSJA
EEPET
EUNCH
ECINECONCS
ETRO
ETRDECONWTOCS
ECUN
EFND
EPECO
EAIRECONRP
ERGR
ETRDPGOV
ECPN
ENRGMO
EPWR
EET
EAIS
EAGRE
EDUARDO
EAGRRP
EAIDPHUMPRELUG
EICN
ECONQH
EVN
EGHG
ELBR
EINF
EAIDHO
EENV
ETEX
ERNG
ED
FR
FREEDOM
FINREF
FJ
FI
FRELIMO
FOREIGN
FAA
FETHI
FAS
FTAA
FRB
FAO
FCS
FINANCE
FWS
FTA
FEMA
FDA
FLU
FRANCISCO
FBI
FORCE
FO
FARC
FK
FT
FCSC
FAC
FM
FMGT
FINV
FCSCEG
FARM
FERNANDO
FINR
FIN
FINE
FIR
FDIC
FOR
FOI
FCUL
FKLU
FMLN
FISO
FIXED
GM
GMUS
GG
GR
GE
GAZA
GT
GH
GZ
GJ
GLOBAL
GV
GABY
GOI
GA
GCC
GB
GY
GATT
GC
GUAM
GEORGE
GTIP
GOV
GOMEZ
GUTIERREZ
GL
GKGIC
GF
GU
GWI
GARCIA
GTMO
GN
GANGS
GIPNC
GAERC
GREGG
GUILLERMO
GASPAR
GERARD
GI
HK
HR
HUMANR
HUMAN
HO
HA
HUMANRIGHTS
HU
HHS
HIV
HUM
HRKAWC
HILLEN
HILLARY
HDP
HUMRIT
HSTC
HUMANITARIAN
HCOPIL
HADLEY
HURI
HL
HRETRD
HOURANI
HG
HARRIET
HESHAM
HI
HNCHR
HARRY
HRECON
HRC
HOSTAGES
HEBRON
HUMOR
HSWG
HYMPSK
HECTOR
HN
HYDE
HUD
HRPGOV
HIGHLIGHTS
ID
ILC
IS
IZ
ICAO
IMO
ITU
IR
IAEA
ICRC
IPROP
IT
IBRD
ISRAELI
IRAQI
ISSUES
ITRA
IV
IO
IGAD
IRAQ
IN
IMF
ICTR
ISCON
IADB
IDB
IEA
INR
IWC
ICCAT
ILO
INMARSAT
IOM
ICJ
IQ
ISPA
ITRD
IPR
INTELSAT
ISN
IAHRC
INTERNAL
IFAD
IICA
IHO
IRAN
IL
IRCE
IC
INTELLECTUAL
IRM
IE
ICTY
IDLI
IFO
ISCA
INF
INL
ISRAEL
INV
IBB
INFLUENZA
ISPL
ITER
ITIA
INRA
ISAF
IACHR
INTERPOL
IFR
IRS
INRB
IEF
ISAAC
ICC
INDO
IIP
IATTC
INAUGURATION
IND
INS
IZPREL
IACI
IEFIN
INNP
ILAB
IA
IMTS
ITALY
ITALIAN
IFIN
IRAJ
IX
ICG
IF
ITPHUM
ITA
IP
IACW
IK
IUCN
IZEAID
IRPE
IDA
ISLAMISTS
ITF
INRO
IBET
IDP
IRC
ISO
ICES
IRMO
ITPGOV
IQNV
IMSO
IRDB
IMET
INCB
IFRC
JA
JO
JP
JM
JCIC
JOHN
JE
JEFFERY
JS
JUS
JN
JOHNNIE
JAMES
JKUS
JOSEPH
JML
JAWAD
JSRP
JIMENEZ
JOSE
JKJUS
JK
JAPAN
KMDR
KPAO
KPKO
KJUS
KCRM
KGHG
KFRD
KWMN
KDEM
KTFN
KHIV
KGIC
KIDE
KSCA
KNNP
KHUM
KIPR
KSUM
KISL
KIRF
KCOR
KRCM
KPAL
KWBG
KN
KS
KOMC
KSEP
KFLU
KPWR
KTIA
KSEO
KMPI
KHLS
KICC
KSTH
KMCA
KVPR
KPRM
KE
KU
KZ
KFLO
KSAF
KTIP
KTEX
KBCT
KOCI
KOLY
KOR
KAWC
KACT
KUNR
KTDB
KSTC
KLIG
KSKN
KNN
KCFE
KCIP
KGHA
KHDP
KPOW
KUNC
KDRL
KV
KPREL
KCRS
KPOL
KRVC
KRIM
KGIT
KWIR
KT
KIRC
KOMO
KRFD
KUWAIT
KG
KFIN
KSCI
KTFIN
KFTN
KGOV
KPRV
KSAC
KGIV
KCRIM
KPIR
KSOC
KBIO
KW
KGLB
KMWN
KPO
KFSC
KSEAO
KSTCPL
KSI
KPRP
KREC
KFPC
KUNH
KCSA
KMRS
KNDP
KR
KICCPUR
KPPAO
KCSY
KTBT
KCIS
KNEP
KFRDCVISCMGTCASCKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KNNB
KGCC
KINR
KPOP
KMFO
KENV
KNAR
KVIR
KDRG
KDMR
KFCE
KNAO
KDEN
KGCN
KICA
KIMMITT
KMCC
KLFU
KMSG
KSEC
KUM
KCUL
KMNP
KSMT
KCOM
KOMCSG
KSPR
KPMI
KRAD
KIND
KCRP
KAUST
KWAWC
KTER
KCHG
KRDP
KPAS
KITA
KTSC
KPAOPREL
KWGB
KIRP
KJUST
KMIG
KLAB
KTFR
KSEI
KSTT
KAPO
KSTS
KLSO
KWNN
KPOA
KHSA
KNPP
KPAONZ
KBTS
KWWW
KY
KJRE
KPAOKMDRKE
KCRCM
KSCS
KWMNCI
KESO
KWUN
KPLS
KIIP
KEDEM
KPAOY
KRIF
KGICKS
KREF
KTRD
KFRDSOCIRO
KTAO
KJU
KWMNPHUMPRELKPAOZW
KEN
KO
KNEI
KEMR
KKIV
KEAI
KWAC
KRCIM
KWCI
KFIU
KWIC
KCORR
KOMS
KNNO
KPAI
KBWG
KTTB
KTBD
KTIALG
KILS
KFEM
KTDM
KESS
KNUC
KPA
KOMCCO
KCEM
KRCS
KWBGSY
KNPPIS
KNNPMNUC
KWN
KERG
KLTN
KALM
KCCP
KSUMPHUM
KREL
KGH
KLIP
KTLA
KAWK
KWMM
KVRP
KVRC
KAID
KSLG
KDEMK
KX
KIF
KNPR
KCFC
KFTFN
KTFM
KPDD
KCERS
KMOC
KDEMAF
KMEPI
KEMS
KDRM
KEPREL
KBTR
KEDU
KNP
KIRL
KNNR
KMPT
KISLPINR
KTPN
KA
KJUSTH
KPIN
KDEV
KTDD
KAKA
KFRP
KWNM
KTSD
KINL
KJUSKUNR
KWWMN
KECF
KWBC
KPRO
KVBL
KOM
KFRDKIRFCVISCMGTKOCIASECPHUMSMIGEG
KEDM
KFLD
KLPM
KRGY
KNNF
KICR
KIFR
KM
KWMNCS
KAWS
KLAP
KPAK
KDDG
KCGC
KID
KNSD
KMPF
KPFO
KDP
KCMR
KRMS
KNPT
KNNNP
KTIAPARM
KDTB
KNUP
KPGOV
KNAP
KNNC
KUK
KSRE
KREISLER
KIVP
KQ
KTIAEUN
KPALAOIS
KRM
KISLAO
KWM
KFLOA
LE
LU
LH
LA
LG
LO
LY
LANTERN
LI
LABOR
LORAN
LTTE
LT
LAS
LAB
LAW
LVPR
LARREA
LEBIK
LAURA
LS
LOTT
LOVE
LR
LEON
LAVIN
LGAT
LV
LAOS
LOG
LN
LB
MOPS
MO
MARR
ML
MASS
MZ
MR
MNUC
MX
MV
MCC
MY
MEDIA
MTCRE
MG
MCAP
MOPPS
MP
MI
MK
MC
MD
MA
MU
MASC
MW
MT
MEPP
MN
MTCR
MH
MEPI
MIL
MNUCPTEREZ
MMAR
MICHAEL
MUNC
MDC
MPOS
MONUC
MAR
MGMT
MAS
MEPN
MENDIETA
MARIA
MONTENEGRO
MOOPS
MSG
MARITIME
MURRAY
MUKASEY
MOTO
MCA
MFO
MEX
MRSEC
MMED
MACP
MAAR
MINUSTAH
MCCONNELL
MAPP
MGT
MARQUEZ
MANUEL
MNUR
MCCAIN
MF
MOHAMMAD
MOHAMED
MNU
MFA
MILITANTS
MINORITIES
MTS
MLS
MILI
MIAH
MEETINGS
MERCOSUR
MED
MARAD
MNVC
MINURSO
MNUCUN
MIK
MARK
MBM
MPP
MILITARY
MAPS
MNUK
MILA
MTRRE
MACEDONIA
MICHEL
MASSMNUC
MUCN
MQADHAFI
MPS
MARRGH
MRCRE
MTRE
MORALES
MAP
MCTRE
MHUC
MOPSGRPARM
MOROCCO
MCAPS
NL
NU
NS
NI
NPT
NATO
NO
NG
NATEU
NSF
NZ
NAS
NP
NDP
NLD
NGO
NEPAD
NAFTA
NASA
NEA
NGUYEN
NIH
NK
NIPP
NONE
NR
NANCY
NEGROPONTE
NRR
NERG
NSSP
NSG
NSFO
NE
NATSIOS
NFSO
NATIONAL
NTDB
NT
NCD
NTSB
NRC
NELSON
NAM
NH
NPG
NEC
NSC
NFATC
NMFS
NATOIRAQ
NAR
NZUS
NARC
NCCC
NA
NC
NEW
NRG
NUIN
NOVO
NATOPREL
NEY
NV
NICHOLAS
NPA
NW
NARCOTICS
NORAD
NOAA
NON
NTTC
NKNNP
NMNUC
NUMBERING
ODIP
OIIP
OPRC
OSCE
OREP
OTRA
OPET
OSCI
OVIP
OECD
OCII
OUALI
OPDC
OEXC
OFPD
OPIC
OFDP
OPCW
OECV
OAS
OM
OMIG
ODAG
OPREP
ORA
OIC
OEXCSCULKPAO
OIG
OASS
OFFICIALS
ORTA
OSAC
OIL
OIE
OEXP
OPEC
OPDAT
OMS
OES
OHI
OMAR
OCRA
OFSO
OCBD
OSTA
OAO
ONA
OTP
ORC
OAU
OXEC
OA
ODPC
OPDP
OVIPPRELUNGANU
OASC
OSHA
OPCD
OTR
OPPI
OPCR
OF
OFDPQIS
OSIC
OHUM
OSTRA
OASCC
OBSP
OFDA
OPICEAGR
OIM
OGAC
OTA
OTRAORP
OPPC
OESC
OCEA
OVP
ON
OPAD
OTAR
OCS
ODC
OTRD
OCED
OSD
ORUE
OREG
PHUM
PINR
PTER
PGOV
PREL
PREF
PL
PM
PHSA
PE
PARM
PINS
PK
PUNE
PO
PALESTINIAN
PU
PBTS
PROP
PTBS
POL
POLI
PA
PGOVZI
POLMIL
POLITICAL
PARTIES
POLM
PD
POLITICS
POLICY
PAS
PMIL
PINT
PNAT
PV
PKO
PPOL
PERSONS
PING
PBIO
PH
PETR
PARMS
PRES
PCON
PETERS
PRELBR
PT
PLAB
PP
PAK
PDEM
PKPA
PSOCI
PF
PLO
PTERM
PJUS
PSOE
PELOSI
PROPERTY
PGOVPREL
PARP
PRL
PNIR
PHUMKPAL
PG
PREZ
PGIC
PBOV
PAO
PKK
PROV
PHSAK
PHUMPREL
PROTECTION
PGOVBL
PSI
PRELPK
PGOVENRG
PUM
PRELKPKO
PATTY
PSOC
PRIVATIZATION
PRELSP
PGOVEAIDUKNOSWGMHUCANLLHFRSPITNZ
PMIG
PREC
PAIGH
PROG
PSHA
PARK
PETER
POG
PHUS
PPREL
PS
PTERPREL
PRELPGOV
POV
PKPO
PGOVECON
POUS
PGOVPRELPHUMPREFSMIGELABEAIDKCRMKWMN
PWBG
PMAR
PREM
PAR
PNR
PRELPGOVEAIDECONEINVBEXPSCULOIIPBTIO
PARMIR
PGOVGM
PHUH
PARTM
PN
PRE
PTE
PY
POLUN
PPEL
PDOV
PGOVSOCI
PIRF
PGOVPM
PBST
PRELEVU
PGOR
PBTSRU
PRM
PRELKPAOIZ
PGVO
PERL
PGOC
PAGR
PMIN
PHUMR
PVIP
PPD
PGV
PRAM
PINL
PKPAL
PTERE
PGOF
PINO
PHAS
PODC
PRHUM
PHUMA
PREO
PPA
PEPFAR
PGO
PRGOV
PAC
PRESL
PORG
PKFK
PEPR
PRELP
PREFA
PNG
PGOVPHUMKPAO
PRELECON
PINOCHET
PFOR
PGOVLO
PHUMBA
PRELC
PREK
PHUME
PHJM
POLINT
PGOVPZ
PGOVKCRM
PGOVE
PHALANAGE
PARTY
PECON
PEACE
PROCESS
PLN
PRELSW
PAHO
PEDRO
PRELA
PASS
PPAO
PGPV
PNUM
PCUL
PGGV
PSA
PGOVSMIGKCRMKWMNPHUMCVISKFRDCA
PGIV
PRFE
POGOV
PEL
PBT
PAMQ
PINF
PSEPC
POSTS
PHUMPGOV
PVOV
PHSAPREL
PROLIFERATION
PENA
PRELTBIOBA
PIN
PRELL
PGOVPTER
PHAM
PHYTRP
PTEL
PTERPGOV
PHARM
PROTESTS
PRELAF
PKBL
PRELKPAO
PKNP
PARMP
PHUML
PFOV
PERM
PUOS
PRELGOV
PHUMPTER
PARAGRAPH
PERURENA
PBTSEWWT
PCI
PETROL
PINSO
PINSCE
PQL
PEREZ
PBS
RS
REFUGEES
RW
RP
RELFREE
RO
REGIONAL
RIGHTS
REACTION
REPORT
RU
RENAMO
RIGHTSPOLMIL
REFORM
RM
REFUGEE
REL
RELATIONS
ROW
RREL
REGION
RATIFICATION
RBI
RICE
ROOD
RODENAS
RUIZ
RODHAM
ROBERT
RGY
ROY
REUBEN
RELIGIOUS
RUEHZO
RODRIGUEZ
RUEUN
RELAM
RSP
RF
RSO
RCMP
REO
ROSS
RPTS
RENE
REID
RUPREL
RMA
RI
REMON
RPEL
RFE
RFIN
RA
RAFAEL
RAY
RUS
RPREL
ROBERTG
RECIN
RAMONTEIJELO
SNAR
SP
SN
SMIG
SL
SOCI
SU
SG
SF
SENV
SZ
SOE
SCUL
SY
SO
SR
SYR
SE
SA
SW
SIPDIS
SCIENCE
SADC
SI
SCI
SOCIETY
SC
SAARC
STR
SECRETARY
SANC
SSH
ST
SNA
SGWI
SEP
SOCIS
SETTLEMENTS
SPECIALIST
SK
SHUM
START
STET
SCVL
SREF
SCHUL
SCUIL
SYRIA
SECURITY
SPCE
SYAI
SMIL
SOWGC
STEPHEN
SNRV
SKCA
SENSITIVE
SECI
SNAP
SPP
SCUD
SOM
SPECI
SMIGBG
SENC
SCRM
SGNV
SECTOR
SENVEAGREAIDTBIOECONSOCIXR
SENVSXE
SASIAIN
SACU
SENVSPL
SWMN
STEINBERG
SOPN
SOCR
SCOI
SCRS
SILVASANDE
SWE
SARS
SNARIZ
SUDAN
SENVQGR
SM
SNARKTFN
SAAD
SD
SAN
SIPRNET
STATE
SENS
SUBJECT
SFNV
SECSTATE
SSA
SPCVIS
SOI
SOFA
SCULKPAOECONTU
SPTER
SKSAF
SENVKGHG
SHI
SEVN
SANR
SPSTATE
SMITH
SCOM
SH
SNARCS
SNARN
SIPRS
SNARM
SIPDI
SCPR
SNIG
SELAB
SULLIVAN
SENVENV
SECDEF
SOLIC
SOIC
SPAS
SASC
SOSI
SEC
SEN
SENVCASCEAIDID
TU
TH
TW
TSPA
TRGY
TPHY
TBIO
TIFA
TS
TZ
TX
TSPL
TT
TK
TC
TINT
TERFIN
TERRORISM
TIP
TURKEY
TI
TECHNOLOGY
TNGD
TRSY
TRAFFICKING
TOPEC
TPSL
TP
TD
TR
TA
TIO
TREATY
TO
THPY
TECH
TRADE
TPSA
TG
TAGS
TF
TRAD
THKSJA
TVBIO
TNDG
TN
TBIOZK
TWI
TV
TWL
TRT
TWRO
TSRY
TTPGOV
TAUSCHER
TRBY
TRBIO
TL
TPKO
TIA
TGRY
TSPAM
TREL
TNAR
TBI
TFIN
TPHYPA
TWCH
THOMMA
THOMAS
TERROR
TRY
TBID
TPP
TE
THANH
TJ
TBKIO
UNGA
USUN
UN
UG
UNSC
UK
UP
US
UNCTAD
UNVIE
UNHRC
USTR
UNAMA
UNCRIME
UNESCO
UV
UNDP
UNHCR
UNCSD
UNCHR
UZ
USAID
UNEP
UNO
UNPUOS
UY
UNDC
UNCITRAL
UNAUS
UNCND
UA
UNMIK
USTDA
USEU
USDA
UNICEF
UR
UNFICYP
USNC
USTRRP
UNODC
UNRWA
UNOMIG
USTRPS
USAU
USCC
UNEF
UNGAPL
UNFPA
UNSCE
USSC
UGA
UEU
UNMIC
UNTAC
UNION
UNCLASSIFIED
USPS
UNA
UMIK
USOAS
UNMOVIC
UNFA
UNAIDS
UNCHC
USGS
UNSE
UNRCR
UNTERR
USG
UE
UAE
UNWRA
UNCSW
UNSCR
UNCHS
UNDESCO
UNPAR
UNC
UB
UNSCS
UKXG
UNGACG
UNREST
UNHR
USPTO
UNFCYP
USCG
UNIDROIT
UNSCD
UPU
UNBRO
UNECE
USTRUWR
UNCC
UNESCOSCULPRELPHUMKPALCUIRXFVEKV
VM
VE
VT
VETTING
VN
VZ
VIS
VC
VTPREL
VIP
VTEAID
VTEG
VOA
VA
VTIZ
VANG
VISIT
VO
VENZ
VAT
VI
VEPREL
VEN
WFP
WTO
WHO
WTRO
WBG
WMO
WIPO
WA
WI
WSIS
WHA
WCL
WE
WMN
WEBZ
WS
WAR
WZ
WMD
WW
WILLIAM
WEET
WAEMU
WM
WWBG
WWT
WWARD
WITH
WMDT
WTRQ
WCO
WEU
WALTER
WRTO
WB
WHTI
WBEG
WCI
WEF
WAKI
WHOA
WGC
Browse by classification
Community resources
courage is contagious
Viewing cable 05GENEVA837, WTO TRIPS COUNCIL, MARCH 8-9, 2005
If you are new to these pages, please read an introduction on the structure of a cable as well as how to discuss them with others. See also the FAQs
Understanding cables
Every cable message consists of three parts:
- The top box shows each cables unique reference number, when and by whom it originally was sent, and what its initial classification was.
- The middle box contains the header information that is associated with the cable. It includes information about the receiver(s) as well as a general subject.
- The bottom box presents the body of the cable. The opening can contain a more specific subject, references to other cables (browse by origin to find them) or additional comment. This is followed by the main contents of the cable: a summary, a collection of specific topics and a comment section.
Discussing cables
If you find meaningful or important information in a cable, please link directly to its unique reference number. Linking to a specific paragraph in the body of a cable is also possible by copying the appropriate link (to be found at theparagraph symbol). Please mark messages for social networking services like Twitter with the hash tags #cablegate and a hash containing the reference ID e.g. #05GENEVA837.
| Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05GENEVA837 | 2005-04-01 13:16 | 2011-08-25 00:00 | UNCLASSIFIED | US Mission Geneva |
This record is a partial extract of the original cable. The full text of the original cable is not available.
UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 07 GENEVA 000837
SIPDIS
PASS USTR FOR MENDENHALL, ESPINEL, PECK
STATE FOR WILSON, FELT
USDA FOR FAS/ITP/SCHWARTZ, TTB/TOBIASSE
USPTO FOR LASHLEY, SALMON
USDOC FOR ITA/SCHLEGELMILCH
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR ETRD WTRO
SUBJECT: WTO TRIPS COUNCIL, MARCH 8-9, 2005
¶1. SUMMARY: The TRIPS Council meeting took place on
Wednesday and Thursday, March 8-9, 2005. Mr. Tony Miller of
Hong Kong, China chaired the meeting. There was an informal
session held on the morning of March 8, with the formal
session beginning on the afternoon of the first and
continuing to the next day. Most discussion took place with
regard to two agenda items. With respect to the Decision on
the implementation of paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on
the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health, the African Group
tabled a paper clarifying some of their reasons for their
proposal from the previous meeting and the United States
tabled a paper clarifying views on the amendment process.
As to the relationship of TRIPS and the CBD, new documents
were tabled by Peru and the delegations of Brazil, India and
a number of co-sponsors. END OF SUMMARY
¶2. INFORMAL SESSION
¶3. The TRIPS Council met in informal session on the
morning of December 1. The Chair raised three issues for
discussion: (1) the decision on the implementation of
paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement
and Public Health, (2) structure of discussions under the
agenda items relating to Article 27(3)(b), the relationship
of TRIPS and CBD and protection of traditional knowledge
(TK) and folklore, and (3) implementation issues.
¶4. The Nigerian delegation made a brief statement under
item one that its delegation would make a submission at the
formal session. The Chair then asked whether any delegation
had (1) any additional flexibility on the matter in order to
meet the deadline, and (2) if meeting the deadline was not
possible, any ideas on further work. No delegation took the
floor.
¶5. On the second item, the Chair noted that he had
undertaken consultations on this issue and noted widespread
view that current discussions were fruitful and allowing all
views. He would present no new proposal on how to pursue
work and suggested that we take up the three agenda items
together, as in past meetings, based on the contribution of
Members. No delegation commented on this issue.
¶6. On implementation, the Chair noted that a progress
report would be prepared and recalled the five options: (1)
resolve issue, (2) no further action, (3) refer issue to a
negotiating body, (4) work under subsidiary body under the
TNC, (5) undertake further work at the TNC. The Chair noted
that his consultations included a wide variety of responses.
For example, some delegations wanted issues to move to a
negotiating body, others saw that the Ministerial
declaration did not include negotiations on these issues and
that a negotiating body or the TNC would not be acceptable.
He noted some delegations identified tirets 88 and 95, both
relating to the relationship of the TRIPS Agreement and the
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), as priorities.
¶7. India gave a statement noting the importance of issues
relating to the relationship of the TRIPS Agreement and the
CBD. The Indian delegation asked the Chair to conduct
dedicated consultations on the issue in his role as Friend
of the DG. Brazil quickly supported the suggestion for
consultations. The delegations of Ecuador, Peru, Thailand,
Dominican Republic, Turkey, Bolivia all supported the
request for consultations. Japan initially objected to the
consultations citing potential duplication of work and
noting WIPO as the appropriate forum for discussion of these
issues. The US noted that we were satisfied with the work
of TRIPS Council on these issues, but we did not object to
consultations.
¶8. In response, the Chair asked whether delegations were
ready to hold such consultations at that moment. India and
Brazil took the floor to welcome consultations and noted
that the TRIPS Council should focus on finding the contours
of a solution in its work, with India in particular stating
that a disclosure requirement had overwhelming support and
the Council should start work on an amendment of the TRIPS
Agreement. Brazil also requested a work program on the
issue. Ecuador, Uganda, Malaysia, Peru, Zimbabwe, and India
all took the floor to support new patent disclosure
requirements. Uganda cited the need for more input from
Africa as this region was a subject for "plunder."
¶9. The US noted its previous paper on the issue, that it
did not believe there was a conflict between the TRIPS and
the CBD and that it does not support new patent disclosure
requirements to resolve this issue. The US noted its
proposals for alternative solutions to the widely shared
objectives of providing prior informed consent, equitable
benefit-sharing from the use of genetic resources and/or
traditional knowledge and preventing erroneously granted
patents.
¶10. AGENDA
¶11. Many agenda items passed without significant
discussion. These items included: notifications under
provisions of the TRIPS agreement, review of implementation
of the TRIPS Agreement under Article 71.1, review of the
provisions of the section on geographical indications under
Article 24.2, follow-up to the review under paragraph 2 of
the decision on the implementation of TRIPS Article 66.2,
technical cooperation and capacity-building, special and
differential treatment proposals referred to the council,
and observer status of intergovernmental organizations. A
read-out of the remaining agenda items follows below.
¶12. REVIEW OF NATIONAL IMPLEMENTING LEGISLATION
¶13. Upon receipt of outstanding answers, the follow-up to
the review of Armenia was deleted from the Council's Agenda.
¶14. review of the provisions of Article 27.3(b), the
relationship of the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD and the
protection of traditional knowledge and folklore
¶15. Peru first made a general statement that TRIPS Council
was the proper forum for this topic and that the discussion
was sufficiently mature and needed concrete action. Peru
wanted a solution by the end of the development round in
order to allow developing countries to solve the problems
they have. Peru then introduced its document IP/C/W/441,
noting that various offices in its government are
investigating 50 products of Peruvian to determine whether
country of origin receives. They stressed the large number
of resources needed to search and analyze patents of major
patent offices in the US, Japan and Europe, but they feel
the need to do so in order to combat bio-piracy.
¶16. Brazil, on behalf of Brazil, India and a number of co-
sponsors, introduced a paper (IP/C/W/442) explaining the
proposal for a new patent disclosure requirement to disclose
evidence of equitable benefit-sharing under a relevant
national regime consistent with an earlier unsuccessful
proposal by the co-sponsors to establish a checklist for
TRIPS Council work in this area. Then, only as the
delegation of Brazil, they expressed sympathy for Peru and
noted a number of examples in which others had attempted to
take out patent rights on genetic resources and traditional
knowledge from the Amazon regions of Brazil, but also
someone "stealing" the name of a fruit and using it as a
trademark.
¶17. India then intervened to support the introduction of
document IP/C/W/442 by Brazil and to emphasize its view that
a mandatory international patent disclosure requirement is
necessary to achieve our objectives. India then introduced,
on behalf of India and Brazil, the paper IP/C/W/443, which
provides "technical comments," point-by-point, on the
previous submission by the United States (IP/C/W/434).
Their general comments were that they agreed with the United
States that national laws are essential, but that they are
not enough as access and benefit-sharing was only effective
if requirements were mandatory and enforceable across
borders. While they agreed that patenting, per se, does not
constitute misappropriation, they stated that disclosure
requirements help identify "opportunity of
misappropriation." They believed that this discussion
showed that there is no alternative to mandatory patent
disclosure requirements to achieve the shared objectives of
the TRIPS Council and that action was needed to address the
mandate under paragraphs 12 and 19 of the Doha Ministerial
Declaration.
¶18. A large number of developing countries, including
China, Cuba, Ecuador, Indonesia, Thailand, Kenya expressed
support for document IP/C/W/442 and called for a
satisfactory solution for the Doha round on these issues.
¶19. New Zealand stated that it saw value in exploring how
IP can assist implementation of the CBD, but had no
definitive view, although it noted that disclosure, in
particular of source and/or country of origin, might support
CBD. They stated that, nonetheless, national systems were
to play a primary role and the answers to non-compliance
with prior informed consent and benefit-sharing were not in
the patent system, which was not the appropriate means to
ensure prior informed consent and benefit-sharing. New
Zealand noted that only a handful of countries have
implemented ABS systems, without which patent disclosure
cannot even play a supporting role. New Zealand further
stated that Members should be realistic and not overestimate
potential "green gold." They further noted that they
supported the Canadian proposal to see how systems would
work in practice.
¶20. Australia stated that is saw no conflict between TRIPS
and the CBD, and that the role of patent system here is not
clear. Australia noted that the possible effects of
invalidating patents, incdlugin that there would be no way
to share benefits. They were also wary of ongoing burdens
on patent applications and patent offices.
¶21. The EC noted their new paper, submitted to the WIPO,
which proposes a disclosure requirement for origin, but not
for evidence of prior informed consent or benefit-sharing,
as these latter two proposals would seriously overburden
patent offices. They also noted that certificates of origin
may be a good idea, but not at this stage. The EC also did
not support any sanctions inside the patent system that, for
example, would include revocation of a patent.
¶22. The United States stated that it sees no conflict
between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD. The US maintained
that the most effective means to achieve the objectives of
authorized access to genetic resources and the equitable
sharing of benefits of such resources is through tailored,
national solutions to meet practical concerns and actual
needs, while the proposed new patent disclosure requirement
will not achieve these important objectives and may have
significant negative consequences, such as undermining the
economic development incentives that patents provide as well
as undermining potential benefit-sharing from patents. On
this point, it was noted that the proposed remedy of some,
invalidating a patent based on inadequate disclosure, would
destroy the benefit sought, rather than ensuring such a
benefit accrues to the appropriate party. The US noted
growing recognition that new patent disclosure requirements,
in and of themselves, will not work to ensure the objectives
sought and that there is growing recognition of the
necessity of contract-based access and benefit-sharing
systems. The US also noted Peru's paper, and noted that the
US had reviewed certain patents granted on maca and
chancapiedra, mentioned in the paper, that appeared to
fulfill patentability criteria and did not represent
examples of biopiracy. The US then rebutted arguments that
new patent disclosure requirements may be necessary to
enforce ABS regimes, noting that such regimes can be
adequately enforced by criminal and civil provisions outside
the patent system.
¶23. Turkey noted that this issue was as important as GI
extension, they welcomed the EC proposal at WIPO and stated
that there is a need for the global problem of bio-piracy.
Norway noted that it is reviewing its policy, that it viewed
the EC proposal very positively, and continues to consider
WIPO very important.
¶24. Canada associated with the statements of Australia and
New Zealand, and stated that there is no conflict between
TRIPS and CBD. They remained unconvinced that patent law
was the best way to ensure prior informed consent or benefit-
sharing. Canada expressed that it was prepared to work with
an "open mind" and they thanked Peru and the United States
for an exchange based on real-life situations and would
invite others to do so.
¶25. Japan noted that there is no conflict between TRIPS and
CBD. As to proposals on patent disclosure, these needed to
be viewed from the perspective of the patent system. They
noted that disclosure of genetic resources should be
discussed at the IGC of WIPO and noted that the DG of WIPO
has stated that this should be done in an accelerated
manner. Japan stated that it shared the views of the United
States to tackle biopiracy in that the US proposal helps to
attack biopiracy without burdening the patent system.
¶26. Peru took the floor again to thank Brazil, India and
the EC for their submissions and to have some additional
comments to the statement of the US. They noted that the
searches they have cited are illustrative of their processes
and not evidence of biopiracy, but only where there could be
a problem. Peru stressed that they wanted to show that if a
disclosure requirement were to be implemented it would be
much simpler for developing countries to monitor bio-piracy.
Currently, having to search patent databases was time
consuming and expensive and all costs were on provider
countries.
¶27. Switzerland supported more discussions with respect to
ABS systems currently in force at the national level. They
then addressed questions to other delegations. To Brazil,
India and the co-sponsors of their documents, they asked
questions regarding definitions of "misappropriation" and
"biopiracy" as well as "country of origin." To the United
States, they asked about the applicability of the contract-
based approach to transboundary cases. They also asked some
technical questions to the EC.
¶28. Philippines supported Brazil, India and others and
stressed that national benefit-sharing schemes are not seen
as proving to be adequate.
¶29. Brazil and India took the floor again at the end of the
session to stress points made previously regarding the
discussion. In particular Brazil emphasized that it had
never suggested that patent disclosure requirements would
solve all the problems that developing countries face, but
that it can be a contribution. While many countries have
not set up ABS systems, yet, all CBD Members were expected
to implement prior informed consent and equitable benefit-
sharing and these principles must be respected even where
regimes have not yet been set up in that country. Brazil
then noted other forums, such as WIPO, cited by Members as
relevant. Brazil then noted that not only the IGC, but also
the PCT as well as the SPLT, where some were trying to
undermine flexibilities under TRIPS. India then emphasized
a number of general points, including their view that patent
disclosure requirements are necessary for an eventual
solution. They also rebutted the EC argument that only
disclosure of origin is mature, noting that disclosure of
evidence of prior informed consent and equitable benefit-
sharing is also necessary. They also looked forward to
consultations held by the Chair, as Friend of the DG, on
this issue.
¶30. Decision on the implementation of paragraph 6 of the
Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and public health
¶31. The Chair opened discussion by noting significant
differences among Members that were apparent from the
consultations that he had held. Further, he noted new
papers from the African Group, the Commonwealth Secretariat,
and the United States.
¶32. Nigeria, on behalf of the African Group, introduced the
African Group proposal (IP/C/W/440) regarding legal
arguments supporting its previous proposal for an amendment
to the TRIPS Agreement to implement paragraph 11 of the
August 30, 2003 solution (IP/C/W/437). They maintained that
their proposal is based, as appropriate, on the Decision as
instructed by paragraph 11 and that the proposal eliminates
a number of provisions that, in their view, are redundant or
where the purpose was served in other parts of the TRIPS
Agreement, and believed their approach to be a viable basis
for undertaking an amendment. With respect to the
Chairman's Statement, Nigeria stated that the purposes of
the Statement were already served or are redundant and
thereby no longer necessary or that the purposes were
already served by other parts of the TRIPS Agreement.
¶33. Nigeria, in lieu of Barbados, also introduced the
document regarding the meeting of the Commonwealth
Secretariat on implementing the Decision on Paragraph 6 of
the Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health. They noted
the following points in particular: (1) the quality and
safety of medicines produced under compulsory license, (2)
concerns regarding Free Trade Agreement provisions regarding
undisclosed test data.
¶34. The United States introduced a new paper, IP/C/W/444.
The United States noted strong support for the August 20,
2003 solution, stated its support for Members' effective and
appropriate use of the solution and remained committed to
reaching an expeditious consensus on the amendment process.
The US maintained that the amendment must preserve the
entire agreement reached in August 30, 2003 and must
therefore include an express reference to both the General
Council decision and the Chairman's Statement. The US
reiterated that it viewed this as a technical exercise that
should not reopen substantive issues. The US also noted
several concerns regarding the African Group proposal,
including that it does not make any reference to the
Chairman's Statement and that it omits key safeguards from
the decision. The US reiterated that it prefers a footnote
approach that reference both the General Council decision
text and the Chairman's Statement as an optimum solution but
that it is willing to consider any other options for an
amendment that includes both the General Council decision
text and the Chairman's Statement.
¶35. The EC noted that it was committed to the March 2005
deadline and that it viewed this process as a purely
technical exercise without re-opening substance. They
stated that it was their impression that some delegations
were trying to get now what they were unable to achieve in
August 2003. The EC did not share the African Group view
that some provisions are redundant or already covered by the
TRIPS Agreement. They then listed changes made in a
paragraph-by-paragraph fashion. They also stated that the
interpretation of "where appropriate" in the African Group
paper was too broad.
¶36. Korea noted the long, difficult negotiations and stated
that substance of the August 30, 2003 solution should not be
reopened. They noted that some provisions, such as the
preamble and paragraph 11 may be OK, it did not believe
elimination or modification of other provisions was
justified. On the Chairman's Statement, they noted that it
was an integral part of the solution and that it contained
"key shared understandings" but that the legal status should
not be changed including the status of the voluntary opt-
outs.
¶37. Canada spoke with reference to the Commonwealth paper
and noted that it appeared that the August 30, 2003 decision
was already working as evidence confirms that price levels
have fall to as low as one-tenth the price prior to the
August solution.
¶38. Jamaica intervened first to note its participation in
the Commonwealth session and the emphasis on quality, safety
and effectiveness welcoming steps by exporters to ensure
that drugs produced under compulsory license meet safety
standards of exporting countries. Jamaica then stated that
they did not support the footnote approach and did not
support including the Chairman's Statement as that had been
a confidence building measure that has served its purpose.
¶39. The delegations of Argentina welcomed the African Group
Proposal as helping to allow an amendment within the time
limits. Brazil suggested that it was a good basis for work,
and noted that it reflected the decision to work "where
appropriate." India also stated that the African Group
proposal was a good basis for further contributions.
¶40. Japan stated that the Council should put what was
agreed into a TRIPS amendment not to interpret what was
agreed. The footnote is the simplest and surest way. They
then stated that the Council should not re-negotiate what
was agreed. Japan also noted a number of problems with
IP/C/W/437, including that it does not include certain
provisions and modifies others and further does not refer to
the Chairman's Statement.
¶41. Uganda noted that it considers the August 2003 solution
as an important step to ensure access. However, it noted
concerns regarding how free trade agreements might prevent a
member from taking steps to ensure public health and asked
the United States to clarify its statement made at the
Commonwealth workshop.
¶42. In response, the United States noted that the
provisions of its free trade agreements do not stand in the
way of the effective utilization of the August 30, 2003
solution. Indeed, a number of its free trade agreements
expressly state that nothing in the intellectual property
chapters of those agreement affect the relevant country's
ability to take measures necessary to protect public health.
¶43. Israel noted that it accepts the decision and statement
together. However, they stated that there should be no
changes in incorporation, including the voluntary opt-outs.
Chinese Taipei stated that they will not support any
suggestion to alter the legal status of opt-outs. Korea,
Hong Kong, China and Turkey also stated that the voluntary
nature of the opt-outs need to be preserved.
¶44. Switzerland stated that the amendment should be a
purely technical amendment that fairly translates what was
agreed. They stated the African Group proposal was
unacceptable as it would re-open negotiations. They noted
that many countries, including Switzerland, were revising
their laws to implement the solution. They added that a
footnote or an annex could be used without affecting the
structure of the TRIPS Agreement, but they are open to other
forms of the solution. Switzerland added that the
Chairman's Statement was part of the consensus and that,
otherwise, Switzlerand could not have shared the consensus.
There would have been no solution without the Chairman's
Statement.
¶45. Kenya began by noting that all Members were committed
to the March 2005 deadline. Kenya stated that the decision
was very clear that the amendment was to be based "where
appropriate" on the Decision and not the Decision and the
Chairman's Statement. They then went through a number of
provisions that they felt are not appropriate in the
amendment, including the preamble and certain other
paragraphs. Further, Kenya stated that a footnote was not
the most appropriate way to amend. He also noted that the
Chairman's Statement should not be reflected and raised the
issue, in the statement, regarding that the solution should
not be for commercial purposes. They asked, if not, how can
developing countries build capacity in these are
¶46. The Philippines added that we should go through the
African Group proposal paragraph-by-paragraph. With respect
to the Chairman's Statement, the Philippines stated that, at
most, this was interpretive context. They stated that the
Chairman's stated could be read out again at time of the
adoption of the amendment subject to the condition that any
Member be able to read out their own statement of
interpretation.
¶47. Switzerland noted that a paragraph-by-paragraph
approach would open a "pandora's box" and may lead to re-
starting negotiations. Instead, the Council should focus on
possibilities to integrated the decision as a whole into the
TRIPS Agreement. As to the Chairman's Statement, he
reiterated that it allowed all Member to join consensus and
represented in its own terms "key shared understandings of
members." Switzerland then stated that it was essential to
incorporate this.
¶48. Malaysia noted differing views on the decision, but
cited the African Group paper that it was based "where
appropriate" on the decision. Malaysia stated that it was
unacceptable to upgrade the status of the Chairman's
Statement by incorporating it and that it was also
unacceptable to re-read the Chairman's Statement as some
have suggested.
¶49. The Chair then noted that, due to the fact that he
would be stepping down as Chair at the end of the meeting,
he proposed that he would suspend the meeting after this
session pending further consultations on this issue to see
if progress could be made by the end of March deadline.
There was no objection. At the time of this report, the
Chair has convened one set of further consultations on which
progress did not appear to be made.
¶50. REQUEST FROM MALDIVES FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE
TRANSITION PERIOD UNDER ARTICLE 66.1 OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT
¶51. The Chair noted that, in light of the tsunami in the
region, the Maldives may withdraw its graduate status under
the UN system. The decision to graduate Maldives, in any
event, is not immediately effective and Maldives would
retain its least developed country status until December
¶2005. There would be no TRIPS Council issue until 2006. In
this light, the Chair suggested the TRIPS Council take up
the matter later this issue, and that consultations be
coordinated between the TRIPS Council Chair and the Chair of
the Committee on Trade and Development (CTD).
¶52. NON-VIOLATION AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS
¶53. Korea began by noting that it shares the view of the
vast majority that non-violation, nullification and
impairment (NVNI) complaints were designed primarily for
market access and would introduce uncertainties into the
TRIPS Agreement. Peru restated that it does not believe
that NVNI is appropriate in TRIPS and that it thought the
issue should be wrapped up in the Hong Kong ministerial at
the end of 2005. For various reasons, Ecuador, the EC, the
Philippines, Canada, Brazil, India, Malaysia, and Argentina
all spoke to oppose the application of these complaints in
TRIPS.
¶54. The United States noted the US continued to consider
that NVNI complaints are fully appropriate in the TRIPS
context and expect the moratorium to expire at the Sixth
Ministerial conference.
¶55. Japan supported continued discussion of the scope and
modalities and such complaints in the TRIPS context.
¶56. INFORMATION ON RELEVANT DEVELOPMENTS ELSEWHERE IN THE
WTO
¶57. The EC raised the issue of lack of compliance by the
United States with the WTO panel decision on the Section
110(5) dispute under TRIPS Article 68. They asked three
questions: (1) Are there any specific legislative
initiatives in the US to bring the Copyright Act into
compliance with TRIPS? In other words, during the past 4
years, has the US Congress discussed any piece of
legislation amending Section 110(5) of the Copyright Act?
(2) What specific steps is the US Administration taking to
ensure that the US brings its Copyright Act into conformity
with the TRIPS Agreement? Has there been any written
communication to Congress that the US could share? (3) When
does the US consider that it will finalize its work to
comply with the WTO ruling, which was adopted in July 2000?
¶58. The United States took the floor to respond that the
The U.S. Administration has been consulting on this matter
with the U.S. Congress, and we will continue to work with
the Congress and confer with the European Communities in
order to reach a mutually satisfactory resolution of this
matter, although it noted that the Dispute Settlement Body
was, in its view, the more appropriate forum for a
discussion of disputes, including compliance issues related
to those disputes.
¶59. OTHER BUSINESS
¶60. The EC raised the issue of enforcement and requested
that this item be added permanently to the agenda of the
TRIPS Council. They noted global problems of counterfeit
goods that threaten legimitate industries.
¶61. Brazil, Argentina, India, and the Philippines noted
that they did not have advance notice of this issue and did
not wish to agree to a permanent additional agenda item at
this time.
¶62. The Chair, noted that as long as Rules 3, 4 and 6 of
the General Council Rules of Procedure are followed, any
item can appear on the agenda. The Chair also noted that it
was not WTO practice to bar discussion of an item unless it
is outside the terms of reference of that body.
¶63. ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON
¶64. The TRIPS Council unanimously elected Ambassador Choi
of the Republic of Korea as the next TRIPS Council Chair.
¶65.
DEILY