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 05GENEVA2798, WTO TRIPS COUNCIL October 25-26 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. #05GENEVA2798.
| Reference ID | Created | Released | Classification | Origin |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 05GENEVA2798 | 2005-11-16 09:17 | 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 08 GENEVA 002798
SIPDIS
PASS USTR FOR ESPINEL, MULLANEY, HAUDA, WINTER, WELLER,
STRATFORD
STATE FOR WILSON, FELT, EB/TPP/IPC, EAP/CM
USDA FOR LASHLEY, SALMON
USDOC FOR ITA/SCHLEGELMILCH
USDOJ PARSKY, CHEMTOB, GAMMS, SHARRIN
E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: EAGR ETRD WTRO
SUBJECT: WTO TRIPS COUNCIL October 25-26 2005
¶1. SUMMARY: The TRIPS Council meeting took place on
Tuesday and Wednesday October 25-26, 2005. Mr. CHOI Hyuck
of Korea chaired the meeting. There was an informal session
held in the morning of October 25, with the formal session
beginning on the afternoon and continuing to the next day.
In particular, discussion continued on the Decision on the
Implementation of Paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the
TRIPS Agreement and Public Health. As to the relationship
of TRIPS and the CBD, new documents were tabled by Peru and
a group of developing countries, and Brazil and India
requested new negotiations on patent disclosure
requirements. The least-developed countries (LDCs)
submitted a request to extend the transitional period for
TRIPS compliance by another 15-years. The formal meeting
was suspended to allow for further discussion on access to
medicines, the relationship of TRIPS and CBD, the LDC
extension request, and issues concerning non-violation and
situation complaints. END OF SUMMARY
INFORMAL SESSION
¶2. The TRIPS Council met in informal session on the
morning of October 25th. 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) Non-violation Nullification Argument,
and (3) LDC extension request.
¶3. Brazil and India requested to be included in the small
group consultations that are occurring, noted concerns over
the status of the Chairman's Statement as part of the
solution, and that the August 30th Decision is the basis for
the amendment. Brazil noted that Members that are not
consulted could not be considered bound by such
consultations and that "no solution would be better than a
bad solution."
¶4. India and Argentina noted that are apparently several
"informal" papers being circulated and discussed, but only
the Africa Group paper is formally on the table, so they
noted that they consider the African Group proposal from
December 2004 as the basis for work.
¶5. The USDEL indicated that consultations on this matter
have been helpful. The USDEL reiterated that the quality of
the amendment should be the same as the agreement reached on
August 30th. It was noted that the U.S. is not seeking to
elevate or diminish the status of the Chairman's Statement,
and that the objective is to preserve the agreement reached.
The USDEL concluded by noting that the amendment process
should be a technical exercise and not a substantive one.
¶6. The EC agreed that the process should be one of a
technical nature and legally secure, and welcomed
intensified consultations on the issue.
¶7. Canada stated that it has circulated a paper noting in
detail how Canada has implemented the solution. Canada also
stated that it has an interest in ensuring that the result
of the amendment process does not result in a change in
Canada's legislation.
¶8. Chair concluded, noting that he did not know when he
would be able to give better ideas as to the timing of
further consultations.
¶9. On NVNI, the Chair stated the status of Members' views
on four recommendation options that are before the Council:
1) a majority have stated that NVNI is inapplicable to
TRIPS; 2) some have stated that the NVNI moratorium should
be extended; 3) a couple have stated that NVNI is applicable
to TRIPS in the context of DSB rules; and 4) one Member
states that the moratorium should expire at the Ministerial.
Colombia added that it has received instructions from
Capital, and that it will maintain its long-standing
position that NVNI is inapplicable to TRIPS. The Chair
concluded, noting that that there is no emerging consensus
and that he will report to the General Council that work
will need to continue in the run-up to the Hong Kong
Ministerial.
¶10. On the LDC extension request, no delegation took the
floor. It was discussed at the formal session.
FORMAL SESSION
FOLLOW-UP TO REVIEWS OF NATIONAL IMPLENTING LEGISALATION
ALREADY UNDERTAKEN
¶11. Egypt responded to follow-up questions submitted by
Switzerland and the United States. Both the U.S. and
Switzerland thanked Egypt for its responses and stated that
it agreed with the Chair that the regular review of Egypt
should be deleted from agenda. It was noted that follow-up
questions can be posed at any time.
Decision on the implementation of paragraph 6 of the Doha
Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and public health
¶12. Brazil began the discussion by noting that its country
takes the access to medicines issue and the amendment
process very seriously. Brazil commented on its publicly
funded AIDS program and that the costs of medicines in
Brazil weighs heavily on Brazilian taxpayers. Brazil noted
that a delicate balance was struck to reach agreement in
August 2003. Brazil stated that there is no reference made
in the General Council Decision to the Chairman's Statement
and that paragraph 11 of the Decision calls for the
amendment to be based, where appropriate, on the Decision
and not on the Statement. Brazil added that it could not
agree to a procedure that would change the legal status of
the Decision or the Statement. Brazil noted concerns that
some Members make reference to "agreed package" or "agreed
solution" and stated that the amendment mandate in the
Decision mentions only the Decision itself. Brazil
continued, noting that the asterisk that was included in
document WT/L/540 (the asterisk states that the Decision was
adopted by the General Council in the light of a Statement
read out by the Chairman) should be removed as it was added
after the Decision was adopted. Brazil added that while the
Secretariat issued a Corrigendum that contains additional
language to that asterisk claiming that it is a Secretariat
note for administrative purposes only, this correction does
not solve the problem and the asterisk should be removed.
Brazil stated that the Africa Group proposal for the
amendment is the only proposal on the table, and provides a
very good basis for the amendment. Brazil argued that there
are elements in the Africa Group proposal that are quite
convincing (ie., removing redundancies when transposing it
to legal text for amendment of the agreement; regional
patent systems probably not appropriate to include in text
of TRIPS). Brazil concluded by stating that it is an
interested party in whatever consultations the Chair carries
out.
¶13. Nigeria made a positive statement that it considers the
consultations to be the most viable way of reaching some
decision before the Ministerial.
¶14. India noted its substantive interest in the issue, both
as supplier and also for its citizens. India stated that it
agrees that the Africa Group proposal is a good basis for
work. Added that the Chairman's Statement is not a part of
the Decision itself and that the subject matter for
amendment is the Decision. India concluded, noting that it
fully supports Brazil's statement regarding the asterisk.
¶15. Argentina reiterated that the Africa Group proposal is
the basis for work on the amendment. Noted that there are
elements in the proposal that deserve close attention.
Argentina noted that it agreed with the proposal that
certain aspects of the Decision should not be included in
the amendment. Noted that the Decision is the only
agreement among the parties that exists, and added that it
does not recall any agreement on placement and use of the
asterisk. Argentina stated that the text should stand as it
was formulated in the General Council.
¶16. Philippines indicated that it is committed to remaining
constructive during the consultations and that it is ready
to participate in any consultations on the matter. Noted
that it continues to maintain that the Africa Group proposal
is important basis for the discussions. It stated that any
decision should be considered in the humanitarian context in
which the Decision was negotiated.
¶17. China stated that it is in process of drafting
implementation regulations for both domestic use and for
export under the Decision. China added that the amendment
will provide legal certainty for all Members.
¶18. The USDEL stated that the consultations have been
helpful for the amendment process. The U.S. reiterated its
position that there needs to be an express reference of the
Chairman's Statement and the Decision in the amendment. The
process should not reopen the solution and noted that they
view it to be a technical exercise. With respect to the
asterisk, the U.S. stated that the corrigendum was
unnecessary and that certainly no further action should be
taken by the Secretariat.
¶19. New Zealand and Australia agreed with the U.S.
intervention that the process should be a technical
exercise. They noted that the question is not whether to
deal with the Chairman's Statement but how should it be
described in the amendment.
¶20. In response to Brazil's comments regarding whether the
Chairman's Statement is interpretive context, the EC noted
that the definition of "context" in the Vienna Convention is
defined in Article 31 paragraph 2a and the Statement is
context for interpretation. India added that the EC's
explanation reconfirms fears about the unclear status of the
Chairman's Statement.
¶21. Korea and Singapore asked that the voluntary opt-out
not be turned into a legal obligation during the amendment
process.
¶22. The Chair stated that the EC paper remains as a non-
paper and that he will continue to hold consultations with
Members.
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.
¶23. PERU PRESENTED A NEW PAPER ON SPECIFIC CASES RELATED
TO THEIR BIOPIRACY CONCERNS. "CAMU CAMU" WAS DISCUSSED AS
AN EXAMPLE. IT IS A WILD FRUIT SIMILAR TO CHERRY THAT COMES
FROM THE AMAZON AND CONTAINS HIGH LEVELS OF VITAMIN C. PERU
NOTED THAT IN THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, THERE HAVE BEEN
ATTEMPTS TO INDUSTRIALIZE CAMU CAMU FOR FOOD AND COSMETICS.
PERU ADDED THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR A MANDATORY DISCLOSURE
OF SOURCE REQUIREMENT, AS PATENT SYSTEMS HAVE FAILED TO
PREVENT PROBLEMATIC CIRCUMSTANCES INVOLVING THE PATENTING OF
GENETIC RESOURCES. PERU REITERATED THAT IT SEEKS TO AMEND
TRIPS ARTICLES 27 & 29 TO INCLUDE MANDATORY DISCLOSE OF
SOURCE OF ORIGIN TO RESULT IN TRANSPARENCY AND SECURITY AND
TO HELP PERU AVOID HAVING TO CONDUCT STUDIES OF WHICH
PATENTS WERE ERRONEOUSLY GRANTED. PERU ALSO ADDED THAT THE
AMENDMENTS WOULD HELP THE PATENT SYSTEM MEET THE DEVELOPMENT
NEEDS OF THEIR PEOPLE.
¶24. INDIA INTRODUCED ITS NEW SUBMISSION ON BEHALF OF
BOLIVIA, BRAZIL, CUBA AND PAKISTAN. THE PAPER IS IN
RESPONSE TO THE CONTRACT BASED APPROACHED PRESENTED IN THE
JUNE SUBMISSION OF THE UNITED STATES. INDIA NOTED THAT
WHILE THE CBD DOES NOT CONTAIN PATENT DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT
PROVISIONS, THE CBD DID CONTAIN OBLIGATIONS THAT COUNTRIES
SHOULD NOT ALLOW INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY TO RUN CONTRARY TO
CBD OBLIGATIONS AND A NEW TRIPS DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT WOULD
ENSURE THIS. INDIA STATED THAT THE KEY PROBLEM RELATED TO
THE ACCESS TO GENETIC RESOURCE ISSUE IS WITH RESPECT TO
TRANSBOUNDARY ACTIONS AND THAT ONLY AN INTERNATIONAL BINDING
SOLUTION WILL SOLVE THE ISSUE. INDIA ALSO STATED THAT "BAD
PATENTS" IS ALSO AN ISSUE AND THAT IT WILL ATTACH A LIST OF
BAD PATENTS IN A FUTURE SUBMISSION. INDIA CONTINUED BY
NOTING THAT ERRONEOUSLY GRANTED PATENTS ARE NOT RARE
EXCEPTIONS, BUT THE BURDEN OF GETTING A PATENT REVOKED IS
HIGHER THAN THE AMENDMENT IT SEEKS. IT WAS NOTED THAT IS
PROPOSAL WILL NOT FORCE COUNTRIES TO ENFORCE THE LAWS OF
OTHER COUNTRIES. INDIA CONCLUDED BY NOTING THAT IT WELCOMES
SUGGESTIONS ON AMENDMENT LANGUAGE.
¶25. The USDEL stated that there was more vigor in the
discussions as there are more facts and issues being brought
forth for discussion. The U.S. stated that national
contract-based systems are essential elements of any system
regarding access to genetic resources, and continues to
consider that new patent disclosure requirements are not
effective in meeting the concerns raised. The answer is
tailored national laws outside the patent system that
regulate conduct in this area. The USDEL continued by
noting the negative effects new disclosure requirements will
have on biotech, as an engine of economic growth. As
result, the amendments in TRIPS could be negative for both
developed and developing countries. If patents are
invalidated, the proposals aim at advancing benefit sharing
will not be realized. The USDEL mentioned that the IGC at
WIPO recently had its mandate renewed on TK/CBD/GR and noted
that it looks forward to the IGC's consultations that will
be informative to the TRIPs Council's work.
¶26. The USDEL also responded to questions posed by
Switzerland at the June meeting. The first was (1) How would
a purely national approach address problems arising with
regard to trans-boundary access and benefit sharing, that
is, cases where genetic resources and traditional knowledge
are used outside the scope of application of the national
solutions advanced by the United States? The USDEL noted
that a contract-based system can provide great flexibility
concerning trans-boundary actions and provide an effective
solution by including appropriate provisions for when
disputes arise, such as choice of forum, choice of law,
and/or binding international arbitration clauses. These
provisions would be helpful whether the dispute is in
country or "transboundary." The contract could also specify
terms regarding the nature of the benefit-sharing
arrangement, regardless of the country in which the
commercialization takes place. Similarly, under a contract-
based system, a monitoring plan for commercial applications
could be established, particular to the facts of each case.
¶27. The second was how would a purely contractual approach
address cases where no contract on access and benefit
sharing has been concluded between the provider and the user
of genetic resources and traditional knowledge? The USDEL
noted that cases in which no contract has been concluded in
violation of the domestic ABS regime, as in any other
situation where a company fails to comply with domestic
regulation, would be governed by the requirements and
penalties of the domestic access and benefit-sharing regime
in place. As a result, such an absence would be enforced by
criminal and/or civil penalties specifically designed for
the ABS regime.
¶28. The third question was how would the proposed approach
take into account the generally long-term nature of research
and development activities involving genetic resources? The
USDEL noted that an ABS system could include regular
reporting requirements for researchers on the nature of
their research, including whether any new commercial
applications are envisioned. The USDEL continued by noting
that a contract-based system is a better mechanism of
addressing long-term R&D activities, since a patent may, and
sometimes does, expire on a newly identified product before
a commercially valuable use of that product is discovered.
Furthermore, a contract based system can better control the
distribution of the genetic resource, if a patent can be
applied for, and how that patent is controlled.
¶29. The USDEL also responded to the questions posed by
India at the June meeting regarding Turmeric. The U.S.
stated the turmeric patent was filed by two Indian nationals
working in the U.S., and that the patent disclosure does, in
fact, disclose India as the country of traditional origin of
turmeric. So a disclosure of origin would not have
prevented the situation from occurring. Moreover, the U.S.
noted that the issue in this case was information relevant
to inventorship and the state of the prior art. The
applicant was already under a type of disclosure requirement
in the U.S. - that of disclosing information material to
patentability. In the turmeric case, information regarding
healing properties of turmeric would have been material to
patentability but such information was not disclosed by the
applicant. The USDEL noted that the re-examination process
allowed for prior art to be brought to the attention of the
USPTO, a reexamination was filed, and the prior art was
applied against the claims in an appropriate and effective
manner, leading to cancellation of all claims in the
turmeric situation. This took place over 19 months. The
USDEL reiterated that it fully supports efforts to
strengthen options to prevent mistakenly granted patents,
such as the requirement to disclose information material to
patentability, the use of organized databases, and post-
grant opposition proceedings, such as reexamination.
¶30. Canada provided questions to the U.S. concerning its
position: 1) would the authorities that would be involved in
monitoring a contract-based system be national or
international in nature, and if international, under which
jurisdiction would they operate; and 2) in a scenario where
sanctions are put into place outside of patent system, what
impact would disclosure requirement have on patent system?
Canada also provided questions to the EC regarding their
textual changes proposed and how would they address access
to benefit sharing arrangements. Canada also asked the
demandeurs to clarify who would be the appropriate party in
a misappropriation suit; would it be the country of source
or country of origin named in the patent? Canada asked
Switzerland who would determine which government agencies
are part of pre-qualified list to help enforce prior
informed consent and access to benefit sharing and what role
would they play?
¶31. Japan noted that it has guidelines for access to
genetic resource documents to help companies understand how
to use the CBD. Japan noted that it does not support the
proposals for patent disclosure requirements made by various
developing countries.
¶32. Thailand, Ecuador, Bolivia and Dominican Republic
supported India and Brazil's submissions.
¶33. In response to Brazil's proposal that the Chair make a
recommendation to the TNC/GC to begin negotiations on patent
disclosure requirements, the USDEL noted that it does not
support Brazil's request and it would not be appropriate for
Chair to make a statement on the matter when there are a
wide divergence of views on the issue. Japan supported the
U.S. intervention, agreeing that it would be premature to do
anything but continue discussing the issue.
¶34. The Chair noted that he will report to the TNC/GC that
there is no consensus and wide divergence of views. The
Chair will keep this agenda item open on a suspended agenda.
NON-VIOLATION AND SITUATION COMPLAINTS
¶35. The following delegations intervened noting that NVNI
complaints should not apply to TRIPS: Canada, Colombia,
Argentina, Peru, Malaysia, Brazil, Chile, Thailand, EC,
Ecuador, India, Indonesia, Cuba and Venezuela. India
further added its interpretation that TRIPS Article 64 will
not allow for NVNI complaints if the moratorium expires.
¶36. The USDEL noted that it supports application of NVNI in
TRIPS and that it expects the moratorium to end at the Sixth
Ministerial Conference.
¶37. Japan and Switzerland stated that they support further
work on scope and modalities.
¶38. The Chair noted that further consultations will need to
take place, as the Council cannot currently make a
recommendation to the TNC. The Chair noted that he will
report to the General Council on the work undertaken on the
matter.
TRANSITION PERIOD FOR LEAST-DEVELOPED COUNTRIES-REQUEST FOR
EXTENSION
¶39. Zambian Ambassador introduced LDC proposal to extend
transitional period for TRIPS Compliance by An additional 15
years. He stressed points concerning that resource and
economic difficulties LDCs face and the costs of
implementing TRIPS obligations. Tanzania, Uganda, Cambodia,
Senegal, Lesotho all supported Zambia's statement.
¶40. Argentina and Brazil commented that no evidence exists
that IPRs are good for developing countries, citing their
Development Agenda proposals in WIPO. They stated that many
developing countries are questioning the benefits of IP and
TRIPS in their economies and whether it actually leads to
technology transfer and development.
¶41. Japan, U.S., EC and Switzerland all indicated that a
more country-by-country approach to the extension request
would be more feasible in order to ensure that all countries
can implement and benefit from the TRIPS Agreement. The
USDEL specifically noted the well-documented links between
IP and development.
¶42. Norway stated that it supported the request but also
stated that IP is essential to development and would come
back to the issue at a later time.
REVIEW OF THE APPLICATION OF THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION
ON GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS UNDER ARTICLE 24.2
¶43. On the Article 24.2 review of the protection for
geographical indications, the EC stated that to further work
in this area the Council should develop an agenda based on
the Secretariat's compilation document developed last year
on the 24.2 checklist responses. The EC added that the
discussion should focus on examining the application of the
GI provisions, but should not focus on Members'
implementation of provisions.
¶44. The USDEL opined that it continues to support a walk
through of the GI provisions paragraph by paragraph, and
that it would be premature to structure the discussions
based on the headings in the Secretariat's document. The
U.S. noted that it is interested in attending any
consultations on the matter.
¶45. The Chair noted that it will revert the matter to the
next meeting.
FOLLOW-UP TO THE SECOND ANNUAL REVIEW UNDER PARAGRAPH 2 OF
THE DECISION ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 66.2 OF THE
TRIPS AGREEMENT
¶46. Rwanda and Zambia noted their appreciation for the
reports submitted by developed countries on incentives to
encourage business to provide technology transfer to LDCs.
Rwanda specifically noted that more measures should be
adopted to encourage technology transfer, and suggested that
a committee of experts comprised of developed countries,
LDCs, and specialists formulate recommendations to make tech
transfer policies more effective.
TECHNICAL COOPERATION AND CAPACITY-BUILDING
¶47. Developed countries submitted their reports on
technical assistance programs in 2005. India raised an item
in the Australian report regarding GI's that they claimed
was mere advocacy of positions and not technical
cooperation. Australia indicated that while they did have
an advocacy session, they stated that a work-shop was also
held with trademark examiners.
¶48. Brazil also noted concern with respect to the technical
assistance activities reported by WIPO, noting that WIPO
mischaracterized the Brazil, Argentina proposal at WIPO
regarding the Development Agenda.
ENFORCEMENT OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS-COMMUNICATION
FROM THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
¶49. The EC noted its paper, tabled at the June meeting,
concerning enforcement matters. The EC noted that it will
elaborate on proposals made in the communication in the
future. The EC added that the level of enforcement rules in
TRIPS can be improved. Moreover the concern over the lack
of enforcement is being debated at G8, Interpol, OECD, WIPO,
and should be discussed at the WTO as well. The objective
of the discussions will be to identify solutions regarding
WTO compliance with enforcement requirements under TRIPS.
The EC requested that the Secretariat produce a synopsis of
Members' contributions to the enforcement checklist in
IP/C/W/5. With respect to the discussion in the Council,
the EC noted that it should seek to: identify difficulties
in implementing TRIPS enforcement provisions; identify the
appropriate mechanisms for addressing the difficulties; and
coordinate a response at the TRIPS level through various
tools, such as best practices. The EC noted that border
measures should be the first topic of discussion.
¶50. Japan stated that the recent development of high
technology and mass distribution has prompted growth in
pirate and counterfeit goods. There have been more reports
that these activities are linked to terrorist groups. Japan
noted that it welcomes the EC proposal which presents very
helpful points. Japan noted that in future meetings,
Members should pay attention to discussions going on in
other fora such as WIPO, G8 and OECD. Discussions in TRIPS
Council should include those noted in paragraph 26 of the EC
proposal: procedures to preserve evidence; calculating
damages methodology; sanctions available at civil and
criminal level; information right; and use of provisional
and protective measures, custom measures and their
availability for export and transit.
¶51. Brazil reiterated concerns expressed in last meeting of
TRIPS regarding EC proposal. It stated that it fully agrees
that piracy and counterfeiting are problems all Members
should address. But Brazil noted that it disagrees with the
focus and activities it proposes the TRIPS Council to
undertake. Brazil noted that implementation of TRIPS is
still an ongoing process for many, if not most, developing
countries and the Council is entertaining an LDC proposal
for extension of the burdensome TRIPS requirements. It
noted that the EC's proposal is unfair, in that, it would
have the Council playing a de facto norm-setting role.
Brazil also noted that this proposal would be redundant with
the work going on at the WIPO enforcement body, which has
also turned down a TRIPS-plus norm-setting role. Brazil
asked that the item be removed from agenda of all future
TRIPS Council meetings.
¶52. Argentina stated that the TRIPS Council agenda already
allows for discussion regarding TRIPS oversight of Members
implementation. Argentina also noted that the EC's proposal
should be off the agenda, as it does not represent the
interest of the majority of the members.
¶53. Canada noted that it is willing to discuss this issue
at future meetings.
¶54. The USDEL noted that the issue is an appropriate and
legitimate exercise for the Council to continue discussions.
The U.S. noted that it will need more time to consider the
details of the proposal, and noted that Council should focus
at present on important work already before us for the
Ministerial run up when we consider how to handle
enforcement discussions for the future. The EC responded
noting that it will provide more detail regarding its
proposal after the Ministerial.
¶55. India, Egypt, China, Philippines, and Chile noted
support for Brazil's recommendation that it be removed from
the agenda.
¶56. Switzerland noted that this is an important issue to be
addressed by Council. In view of the Ministerial,
Switzerland noted that it probably was not the time to do it
now in the run-up. But Switzerland noted that it wants to
discuss this issue again at the next formal meeting.
Korea noted that the issue of enforcement is being discussed
at APEC, WIPO, and the OECD. Korea added that when the EC
proposal is available as formal document, they will comment
on it.
¶57. The EC stated that it views the issue to be an
appropriate discussion item for the Council, and that they
are not trying to make the Council a norm-setting body, or a
tribunal for how members are enforcing TRIPS.
¶58. Chair noted that this matter will be reverted to the
next meeting.
OBSERVER STATUS FOR INTERNATIONAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL
ORGANIZATIONS
¶59. Brazil and other delegations expressed support for
observer status for the South Centre and the CBD. While
Egypt reserved its right to come back with a written
opinion, the USDEL noted concern about granting observer
status for several of the international observer
organizations, including that guidelines have not be
established by the General Council.
OTHER BUSINESS
¶60. The U.S., Switzerland and Japan submitted an Article
63.3 request for details on specific enforcement cases in
China. China noted it will study the requests, but stated
it will not take any more obligations than required, and
that Members should not take action based on unilateral
interpretations. Japan, Switzerland and the U.S. noted that
they submitted these requests with the hope of enhancing
understanding of IPR enforcement in China and look forward
to China's responses.
¶61. The Chair also announced the following tentative dates
for TRIPS Council sessions in 2006: 14-15 March 2006, 14-15
June 2006, and 24-25 October 2006.