¹ The First Ministerial Conference after the establishment of the WTO took place in Singapore in 1996, the Second in Geneva itself in 1998, and the Third in Seattle in 1999.

² See for the outcome of the Doha Conference WT/MIN(01)/DEC/W/1 of 14 Nov 2001.

³ As early as 2 Mar 1999, Clare Short, the UK Secretary of State for International Development, had urged all to make the next round of trade negotiations a ‘Development Round’. See her speech on ‘Future Multilateral Trade Negotiations: A ‘Development Round’?’ delivered at UNCTAD, Geneva on 2 Mar 1999, DFID, London.

⁴ For instance, see the statement issued by Malawi outlining its proposals for the Doha Conference: WT/GC/W/451 of 11 Oct 2001.

⁵ 25 ILM (1M86), 1623.

⁶ Para A (i) of the 1986 Declaration.

⁷ Para B (iv).

⁸ Para B (v).

⁹ Para B (vii).

¹⁰ GATT Art XVIII is an example.

¹¹ GATT Art IV (1), (2), and (3) is an example of a provision which provides for specific commitments to facilitate the increasing participation of the least-developed countries in world trade. Even then his provision is limited to the strengthening of their domestic services capacity and its efficiency and competitiveness rather than greater access to the markets of the developed world.

¹² Art 15 (2) of the WTO Agreement on Agriculture.

¹³ ACP Press Release: ACP Group's position ahead of the WTO Conference issued on 7 Nov 2001 (ACP/61/132/01).

¹⁴ See for text of the ACP Declaration on the Fourth Ministerial Conference adopted in Brussels, 5–6 Nov 2001; WT/L/430.

¹⁵ Preamble to the statement of the ACP countries.

¹⁶ Ibid.

¹⁷ A new agreement was concluded between the EU and the ACP countries on 23 June 2000 after the expiry of the Lome Convention. See for text of the new ACP-EC agreement, DN: IP/00/640 of 21 June 2000 <http://europa.eu.int/comm/development/cotonou>.

¹⁸ WT/L/424 of 24 Oct 2001, para 3.

¹⁹ Ibid, para 6

²⁰ WT/L/423 of 18 Oct 2001.

²¹ See for text of the Zanzibar Declaration: WT/L/409 of 6 Aug 2001; see also the Brussels Declaration of the Third UN Conference on the Least-developed Countries, 14–20 May 2001: UN Doc A/Conf.191/L.20 of 20 May 2001. It was the Brussels Declaration and the Programme of Action that had contained some of the elements of the development agenda that the LDCs were able to elaborate through the Zanzibar Declaration. See UN Doc A/Conf191/13 of 20 Sept 2001.

²² For instance, the Nepalese Minister for Industry, Commerce and Supplies suggested in his statement at Doha that the conference should mainstream the development agenda in international trade negotiations. He also pointed out that because of high demand placed on new applicant LDCs for membership of the WTO, not a single LDC had succeeded in acceding to the WTO since its establishment: WT/MIN(01)/ST148 of 12 Nov 2001.

²³ The Economist, Special Report ‘Playing Games with Prosperity’, 28 July 2001, 26.Google Scholar

²⁴ See the joint statement of the Commerce Ministers of the South Asian Association for Regional Co-operation (SAARC) of 23 Aug 2001: WT/L/412. The SAARC countries stated in para 4.1 (C) of their joint statement that: ‘There is an immediate need for a more meaningful integration of the textile and clothing sector, in view of very limited liberalization of trade, affecting items under specific quota restraints. Measures in this regard should include, inter alia, accelereated removal of quota restrictions whereby an additional 50% of imports of products from the four product groups are integrated at the commencement of third state of integration of 1 January 2002, implementation of increased growth rates for the remaining years of the Agreement on Textiles and Clothing, exercise of restraint on unilateral modification of rules of origin to the detriment of developing and least-developed countries, application of moratorium on anti-dumping, anti-subsidy and safeguard measures, resorted to by importing countries on exports from developing and least-developed countries until 1 January 2007.’

²⁵ The first Ministerial Conference held in Singapore in 1996 had decided, as preferred by developing countries, to keep labour standards out of the world trade agenda.

²⁶ Such issues include labour standards, rules on foreign investment and competition policy. See para 22 and 23 of the statement of the ACP countries: ACP Press Release: ACP Group's position ahead of the WTO Conference issued on 7 Nov 2001 (ACP/61/132/01).

²⁷ WT/MIN(96)/DEC/W of 13 Dec 1996.

²⁸ The ACP countries had sought a seal of approval of the Cotonou ACP–EC Partnership Agreement from the WTO members. The ACP Countries were seeking a waiver from the obligations of the EC under para 1 of Art 1 of the GATT (the MFN Principle) with respect to the granting of preferential tariff treatment for products originating in ACP States and the waiver was granted, under narrowly defined conditions, by the WTO meeting. See WT/MIN(01)/15 of 14 Nov 2001.

²⁹ See for the speech of Indian commerce secretary: WT/GC/459 of 6 Nov 2001.

³⁰ Preambular para 2 of the Doha Ministrial Declaration (WT/Min (01)/DEC/W/1) of 14 Nov 2001.

³¹ Para 13 of the Doha Declaration, ibid.

³² Here the Doha conference was endorsing the outcome of the Third UN Conference on Least-developed Countries (LDC-III) held in Brussels in May 2001.

³³ Para 44 of the Doha Declaration.

³⁴ Parallel importing is a scheme whereby a product sold more cheaply in one country can be imported into another country without the patent holder's permission.

³⁵ Para 19 of the Doha Declaration.

³⁶ Para 22 of the Declaration of the LDCs: WT/L/409 of 6 Aug 2001. Individual members such as Malawi had pinpointed the problems of developing countries with regard to certain provisions of the TRIPS agreement and out forward their proposals for its amendment. Criticising the provisions of Art 27.3 that provides for patentabilty of life forms, Malawi argued that ‘there should be a formal clarification that naturally occurring plants, animals, biological processes for the production of plants, animals and their parts must not be patentable’, WT/GC//W/451, para 5.2.

³⁸ Para 18 of the main Doha Declaration.

³⁹ WT/MIN(01)/DEC/17 of 20 Nov 2001.

⁴⁰ Although there was already an Agreement on Trade-Related Investment Measures (TRIMS) in existence adopted as part of the 1994 Uruguay Round Agreements, the scope of this agreement is limited, as the title of the agreement itself conveys, to narrow trade-related investment measures.

⁴¹ International Convention for the Settlement of Investment Disputes, 1965: 4 ILM 532 (1965).

⁴² See a WTO briefing paper, ‘Trade and Investment: Negotiate, or Continue to Study?’, <http://www-chil.wto-ministerial.org/en…minist_e/min_01_e/brief_e/brief/12_e.htm>.

⁴³ Ibid.

⁴⁴ Tuna Dolphina I: 30 ILM 1594 (1991) and Tuna Dolphin II: 33 ILM 839 (1994).Google Scholar

⁴⁵ WT/DS58/AB/R, 12 Oct 1998.

⁴⁶ WT/DS184/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body of 24 July 2001.

⁴⁷ The Economist, ‘World Trade beyond Doha’, 17 Nov 2001, 13.Google Scholar

⁴⁸ See press release of the WTO to this effect <http://www.wto.org/english/news_newse/pres02_e/pr279_e.htm> of 11 Mar 2002.

⁴⁹ Indeed, the EU has already indicated that it wishes to negotiate a new free trade pact with the seventy-six ACP countries under which the EU countries will seek dismantling barriers in the ACP countries that prevent European goods and services from entering their markets. ‘EU urges pacts with ACP States’, Financial Times, 10 Apr 2002, 11.Google Scholar

⁵⁰ See the speech made by the current Director-General of the WTO, Mike Moor, at the UN Conference on Financing for Development on 21 Mar 2002 in Mexico, <http://www.wto/english/news_e/spmm_e/spmm81_e.htm>.

⁵¹ ‘Trade war looms as US puts tariff on steel imports’, The Financial Times (London), 6 Mar 2002, 1.Google Scholar

⁵² WT/DS184/AB/R, Report of the Appellate Body of 24 July 2001.

⁵³ The Economist, Special Report: World Trade, ‘Playing Games with Prosperity’, 28 July 2001, 28.Google Scholar