The Wto Was Established To Implement The Final Act Of Uruguay Round Agreement Of

11 Oct

The twenty agreements were signed in Marrakesh in April 1994 – the Marrakesh Agreement. The package is part of an ongoing process to ensure significant incremental cuts in aid and protection. In this context, it calls for the continuation of negotiations in the fifth year of implementation, which, together with an assessment of the first five years, would take into account non-trade-related issues, special and differential treatment of developing countries, the objective of creating a fair and market-oriented agricultural trading system and other concerns and objectives set out in the preamble to the agreement. Overall, the importance of the WTO can be put into a clearer perspective if we look at the counterfactual view. Without the WTO, the amendments and disciplines introduced by the Uruguay Round would nevertheless have been incorporated into the provisional nature of the GATT framework. The last part of this Part of the Agreement concerns anti-competitive practices concerning contractual licences. It provides for consultations between Governments where there is reason to believe that licensing practices or conditions related to intellectual property rights constitute an abuse of those rights and harm competition. Remedies against such abuses must be in accordance with the other provisions of the Agreement. The innovative features of the revised agreement are that it covers processing and production methods relating to the characteristics of the product itself. The scope of conformity assessment procedures is broadened and the disciplines specified. Notification rules for local governments and non-governmental authorities will be developed in more detail than in the Tokyo Round Agreement.

A code of conduct for the preparation, adoption and application of standards by standardisation bodies, which can be accepted by both the private and public sectors, is annexed to the Agreement. The AmS as a whole covers all support provided either on a product-specific or non-product-specific basis, which is not eligible for an exception, and should be reduced by 20 per cent during the implementation period (13.3 per cent for developing countries without reduction for LDCs). As regards geographical indications, the agreement provides that all parties must release funds to prevent the use of undue information by the consumer in error as to the origin of the goods and any use that would constitute an act of unfair competition. . . .