WTO AFTER HONG KONG: Death or Survival?

WTO MOCK SUMMIT

DEPARTMENT OF POLITICAL SCIENCE
BAYERO UNIVERSITY, KANO.
NIGERIA.



BRIEFING PAPER


WTO AFTER HONG KONG:
Death or Survival?

By
MM Yusif

@2008





Introduction
The mighty unpenetrable block of globalization is most likely cracking. The world trade organization, the unmovable stone holding tight this process is already over stretched. The WTO Ministerial Conference is the highest decision and policy-making body of this great organization. Yet it failed to hold its regular meeting of the year 2007.
Going by the records of these meetings it is not wrong to say that it is the only forum which brings every sovereign state, major corporate business interest as observers and lobbys and many other groups as civil society organizations and media crew. In short it is a gathering of global economic powers and interests.
According to the law establishing the WTO the Ministerial Conference holds every two years. The last was at Hong Kong in 2005. The next was to convene in 2007 but up till now, in the year 2008 it did not hold. What is the problem with WTO that its major activity cannot meet a constitutional provision? Does it mean that at Hong Kong there was no accepted agenda to carry out the organization forward through the following two years? Or are there stalements in the negotiations which were to take place after Hong Kong? What is happening with the implementation of WTO Agreement? What of the power structure within the WTO?
From Cancun to Hong Kong
The first Ministerial Conference of the WTO was in Singapore in December 1996. The Second was in Geneva in May 1998. The controversial Seattle Ministerial Conference was the Third major multilateral trade negotiation meeting. But it was a total failure. The failure at Seattle was a serious setback to the global trading system. It was like the entire multilateral trading system under the WTO was going to collapse and give way to another. Inspite of Seattle, the WTO system returned with full force, deception and viciousness on the countries of the developing world. At Doha Ministerial Conference, in Qatar November 2001, the developing countries are deceived and silenced with so called Doha development Agenda. The Doha appeared like an appeasement but in reality ministers from the developing countries were coerced to consent to all issues pertaining to liberalization of agriculture, market access for non-agricultural products; the implementation of Intellectual Property Rights (IPR)S to support industrialization, relationship between trade and investment e.t.c (see WTO website- www.wto.int.)
The interim between Doha and Cancun-Mexico in September 2003 generated discord over implementation related difficulties. For many developing countries these difficulties are expressed in term of lack of technical know-how, lack of financial, human and institutional resources and that many of the Agreements were beyond the comprehension of many government officials and were unable to put it into effect even if they had wanted to do. The power structure in the WTO reflects the power relationship in the global economic system. The giant corporate business interests control the organization. All the agreements under the WTO regime are drafted and compiled by these multinational corporations and sold to WTO. Their home governments are very influential to defend them. That is why in the activities and administration of WTO there is always hearing of the Quads. i.e United State, Canada, European Union and Japan. The idea of reaching Agreement by consensus is to allow the position of these to prevail. Also of the Green Room.

For this reason, the Cancun Ministerial Conference ended in an impasse. Instead of a democratic dialogue between the developed and the developing countries to ease the tensions of developing states over the implementation of the WTO agreements as Pascal Lamy, the current Director General of WTO, who was the chief negotiator of the EU at Cancun, termed the WTO as a “medieval” organization. What does this show? This reveals that the WTO at Cancun conducted itself like a chieftaincy system, refusing to hear and discuss the complaints of majority members of the organization. Therefore, the problem since Hong Kong has started from Cancun. The former Indian commerce minister summed up the outcome of the Cancun in one sentence when he said that we ended with “no deal is better than a bad deal.”
The fragile condition of the WTO regime is the result of explosive growth in the capacity and influence of the developing states to refuse to be coerced by the strong powers in the WTO. First, from global perspectives of global governance, the coming states in the South-China, India, Brazil and South Africa are already taking the global system off its traditional course. Thus, the supremacy of USA and the West is beginning to falter. Secondly there is increasing growth of regional trade relations which although are being regulated by the global trade regime but is moving beyond the control of WTO.
These have helped to erode the power of the strong economies in the world and is mirrored most dramatically in the WTO system. A reflection of this in the global trade structure is the forming of coalitions to oppose the dictate of the major interests in the organization. Many such coalitions as G20 later becomes G22, G33 and G90 exist.
The coalitions are making the weaker nations gradually acquiring stronger voice demanding a genuine market opening concessions from powerful nations like the United States.
Exactly the G20 alliance was created around the issues of agricultural trade, but its strength and success generated counter balance against United States and European Union in other trade negotiations. This group which appeared shortly before Cancun meeting, the members are all from developing countries. These are:
Brazil; China; India; South Africa; Argentina; Bolivia; Chile; Cuba; Egypt; Indonesia; Mexico; Nigeria; Pakistan; Paraguay; Philippine; Thailand; Tanzania; Venezuela; Zimbabwe; Kenya.
Whereas there is no ranking among the members, yet the first four listed above set the tone. This is no surprising as they are the strongest economies of the developing world and at other levels of global politics are being canvassed to join the G8 in the global governance.
There is also the G33. These too are developing countries. These countries which also appeared in Cancun are importers of Agricultural products, many of them also single crop producers and exporters. They demand exceptions for certain products as full liberalization could badly hurt their economies and populations. They are.
Barbados, Botswana, Congo, South-Korea, Coted’voire, Cuba, Dominican Republic, Haiti, Hondorus, Mongolia, Mozambique, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Panama, Peru Philippine, Senegal, Srilanka, Tanzania, Trinidad and Tobago, Turkey, Uganda, Venezuela, Zambia, Zimbabwe.
There is also the G90. Like the G20and G33, this group was also born in Cancun to oppose attempts by the USA and EU to include the so called Singapore issues – investment, competition policy, government procurement and trade facilitation, in the negotiations. This group drawn from the developing economies of Latin America and Asia was led by Guyana.
By the time of Cancun, whereas there were divisions of interest among and between members of the various coalitions and some skillfully tried to identify with the major powers in the WTO regime yet, this has never covered the reality that the global trade system is getting into crisis. One exhibition of this crisis is that some developed countries in the WTO-France, Italy, Germany and Britain- are identifying with interest of these coalitions. Secondly, many disputes between the USA and the developing states were settled in favour of the developing countries. Thirdly some of the negotiations to prepare for Hong Kong were never concluded. So the Hong Kong was virtually called and attended by developing state without enthusiasm toward any agreement.
The Hong Kong
One analyst from center for International Trade, Economics and Environment, India observed that “The Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong began on a very pessimistic note. A day before the inaugural, the attendance was very poor. Delegates of the WTO member countries even did not reach. The general impression was that not much was going to happen at Hong Kong.”
Undoubtedly, that was how the Hong Kong Ministerial Meeting started and that was how it ended. The scene of the conference looked like Gramscian “war of Position” between four centers of power – G20; G33; the USA and EU on one side and then the least developed countries; each wanted to contest against the coalition of the USA and EU.
The developing countries had many vital issues to be resolved. These include:
1. The cotton initiative: Agreement to address all trade distorting policies affecting the sector--farm subsidy to be eliminated by developed countries. To allow market access for cotton exports from LDCS; promote export competition by not subsiding export. These are generally applicable to agricultural trade
2. Amendment of TRIPS Agreement to address the public Health concerns of poor countries
3. The duty and quota free market access on all product i.e. NAMA. This involved tariff reduction, non tariff barriers; and preference erosion.
4. Services: developed countries are to make higher level of liberalization of trade in services with appropriate flexibility for developing countries. But because of the weakness of the economies of LDCs, to allow them the right to regulate trade in services.
5. Small economies: to guarantee full integration of small economies into the multilateral system without creation of sub-category of WTO members
6. Problems of implementation of WTO Agreements – e.g. of TRIP relating to biological diversity
7. Aid for trade: particularly for LDC’s, aid should be provided to build capacity and related infrastructure in order to benefit from participation in global multilateral trade system.
Many other less important issues such as on technical cooperation, commodity issues, trade and transfer of technology, trade and finance and on settlement of disputes.
However, the developed countries remained non-committed to those seven critical issues of the developing countries. They have refused even to discuss the problems such that there had not been any deal at Hong Kong as negotiations were only postponed. But it was brilliantly managed in order to avoid another collapse of WTO Ministerial Conference
Naturally, as observers argued, the only achievement of Hong Kong is that the Ministerial did not fail. A journalist from financial times said the trade ministers had met just to keep the organization alive.


AFTER HONG KONG: WHAT IS HAPPENING?
Three years after Hong Kong the most powerful international organization, managing and moving the current globalization has gone to sleep and still is not awake. What is happening?
In between ministerial conferences which hold every two years, there is a general council which carries on the activities of the organization and the direction set by ministerial meeting. Inspite of the disagreement at Hong Kong, the ministerial declaration was released and it was expected that by 2006 negotiation in various panels and committees would be concluded, and therefore, the 2007 target of the ministerial could be met. But it seems these negotiations are once again plunged into serious crisis. A WTO monitor has observed that in 2006 three deadlines of meetings on eliminating farm export subsidies, and non-Agricultural market access failed. Another meeting on the issue of services too is revised. Again what is it that is happening?
Disagreement among countries on trade issues were and are not uncommon. In the past history of global trade relations these took dangerous dimension leading to wars between nations. Famous historians and economists documented that in the past, global free trade came and collapsed because big economic powers monopolized the benefits and the weaker ones suffers lacks of growth and development as well as poverty.
The contemporary global free market trade under the WTO regime is undoubtedly being captured and is controlled by American corporate interests. These have created irreconcilable differences between the USA and the developing world, the developed and the developing countries, also divisions of opinions and expectations among the developed countries. So many other deep divisions.
The disharmony is enough to bedevil completion of negotiations to prepare for another Ministerial Conference after the Hong Kong. Add to this, the situation is taking sharp political and ideological differences. This can be seen from the following issues for WTO regime to address
1. Unlike the GATT dealing separately with few developing countries. Or even the WTO regime, when it started with only 65 countries who attended the Uruguay Round, now there are more than 140 developing countries. Their number is a strength, yet the WTO had not evolved a new decision-making process to accommodate this new force. Thus, it has become impossible for the WTO regime to continue to function as an undemocratic organization.
2. Subsequently, there is need of reform of the institutional structure of the WTO regime as it is becoming increasingly evident that the largest trading countries who manipulate the WTO system, has now bred mutual distrust and lack of credibility in the system. For example the so called “Green Room” consultation process which had worked well in early years of WTO system, is now hardly accepted with large number of member country delegations. Therefore, the question of transparency has become an issue which must be resolved in order to move forward.
3. Question of unity but with diverse interest is often at the heart of the WTO system. Therefore, the global trading institution could always get it much easier to do the bidding of the big corporate interests. Its consensus strategy would not be disturbed. However, with growth of coalition movements G20; G33, G90; G77 and many other blocs around specific interests has already turned the table against the WTO regime.
4. Naturally, the Dispute Settlement Process (DSP) too is getting a new force because of the silent revolution in the WTO system. The DSP is like a judicial system of the regime. Rather than retaliate or apply blockage the system allows a member to file a complain against another member. A panel is established to hear the case and make recommendation. The process is thorough. The record of the WTO system shows that in the early years of this “New Trade” the USA had made all the complaints and had won all the cases. But now the united states of America had lost many cases. The government and the corporate interest in united state of America are not silent on these issues. They have already started a debate whether the WTO regime is good for the interest of USA. In other words, they are asking a question whether the Multilateral Trading System will continue to be the engine for growth and prosperity. The stakes for USA are that on the DSP, many members do not adhere to the decisions, while many DSP decisions do not consider US trade laws in passing judgment. Other issues of disagreement with WTO system are on the rules and regulations of standards on labour, environment and food safety. The US corporate interests in developing countries are putting pressure to follow these standards. But in their own country the debate is whether the WTO regime has the power to make the government of USA to change its domestic laws
While the united state has an interest in the benefit derived from being part of the WTO system, some corporate interest are turning against the multilateral trading system, and the debate is still going on whether to continue to participate or go for alternatives through bilateral or regional trade relation.
Conclusion
An activist and critic of the WTO system, Walden Bello has already noted that from the free market paradigm that underpins the international trading system, “to the rules and regulations set forth in the different agreement that make up the Uruguay round, to the system of decision making and accountability, the WTO is a blue print for global hegemony of corporate America”.
The system is deliberately designed to execute the majority members from the developing world so that they could suffer untold consequences or marginalization and inequality in favour of increasing richness of giant corporations in the global trading system.
Given this trend, the belief widely held by countries in the developing world is that this process must be reversed. The problem however, is whether an organization such as the WTO, which is fundamentally founded to promote powerlessness and inequality of the south vis-à-vis the north, could be reformed.
The developed countries, the USA in particular, still needs the WTO arrangement. But is there willingness to carry out some reform measures in the regime. Whatever, as a result of solidarity among the developing countries, there is already a silent revolution seen coming in the international trading system. Some giant corporate interests in USA, transnational elites and professionals in the WTO secretariat, are against these changes.
Now, in the third year after Hong Kong. What will happen to the WTO regime? Will it be left to die or a checkered living? Or will the giant corporations and their governments return to the control of the WTO regime with a renewed military power and strategy against the developing world.
References
1. Dilip K.D (2002). Global Trading System. Website
2. Dimas Garba (2006) The Myths and Realities of WTO agreements on industrialization in Third World countries. Being a Project submitted to the department of political science, faculty of social and management sciences, Bayero University Kano, in partial fulfillment of the Award of Bachelor of Science Degree in Political Science.
3. Lan F.F and Lenore S. (2005), World Trade Organization: The continue Participation Debate. CRS Report for Congress. Website.
4. Walden Bello(2001). The Future in the Balance: (Essay on globalization and resistance Oaxland, California food First Books
5. William G (2003) The Nation. Website
6. WTO (2005) Hong Kong Draft Ministerial Declaration. Website.



ANNEX A
DIRECTION FOR WTO MOCK SUMMIT
AUGUST, 2008
1. The fourth WTO Mock Summit is planned to hold in first week of August.
2. It is the 2007/2008 performance-tagged Senegal 2008
3. It is going to be modeled on the situation of the WTO regime after Hong Kong.
4. The situation is that the regime is in crisis:
a. The governance of the WTO system is questioned by the majority members from developing countries.
b. Subsequently, these countries have mastered power, through coalitions to turn many activities of the WTO regime in their favour.
c. Therefore, many negotiations are stalled to check the excesses of the quads in another Round. Accordingly, this Mock round is going to be tense.
d. In the sense that the developed world would come with usual show of power to reassert their positions in the regime
e. The developing countries will insist against the bad practices of the WTO regime.
f. We will like the scenario to show that developing countries are winning, the rank of the developed states breaking, and a deadlock because of the stand of USA.
5. The principal issues to be aware of are
a. Agriculture
b. Sanitary and Phytosanitary measures
c. Trade-related Aspects of intellectual property rights
d. Standard: labour, environment and food safety- covered by SPS measures
e. Trade Related Investment Measures
f. Trade and Competition policy
g. Services – particularly information technology products
h. Textile and Clothing
i. Market Access for non-Agricultural products
j. Transperancy and government procurement
k. Regional Trade Agreement
l. Dispute settlement understanding
m. General institutional structure of WTO system
n. Implementation problems

ANNEX B
PREPARATION FOR THE MOCK SUMMIT
1. Training will take-off by the Director delivering a lecture on the recent issues before the WTO.
2. All the participants are expected to attend. This year I will take it very serious, to drop those who are missing the training exercise.
3. After the lecture all the participants will be divided into working groups each to be headed by one of the participants – according to my judgement of his/her ability on the issues
4. The topics of the working groups would be: Agriculture, NAMA, DSP; institutional structure of WTO; The agreements; WTO-Regional Trade; implementation; Agro-allied interests
5. The resource persons as chairmen of the working groups are; Umar Danjuma; Hamza Marafa; Adamu Isma’il, Shehu Haruna; Aliyu Zubairu; Awwal Abubakar; Fararaddeen Abdulrahman Dodo; Isma’il Galadima; and Murtala Garba.
6. Following the working group discussions the actors will be given one week to do further research and submit a report on the issues to be presented during the summit.
7. Finally, there will be a rehearsal of two weeks. Then the Summit will hold.

ANNEX C
SELECTED COUNTRY’S REPORT
1. BRAZIL
Ø Contrary to WTO message of liberalization of trade, the USA imposed sanctions against Brazilian Exporters of steel products to US market
Ø Also with Canada on the subject of subsidies for the export of airplanes for regional passenger transportation
Ø Then conflict with the multinational pharmaceutical corporations which produce medicines distributed free of charge by the Brazilian Government to HIV infected persons.
Ø Deadlock on barriers to and subsidies for agricultural products imposed by developed countries.
Ø Reassessment of TRIMS or Demanding at least that trade-related investment measures not be applicable to the developing countries
Ø Brazil with three other countries – Argentina. Paraguay and Uruguay in an independent regional cooperation arrangement - measures which brings it into conflicts with USA and hence the WTO procedures.
Ø Thus, it is persistently against the WTO on the issue that WTO must not undermine the national sovereignty of members from the developing world.

2. NIGERIA
Ø Whereas we need assistance and even partnership to build our small and medium scale industries, but we insist that such assistance would not be under condition that we must source production machine and equipments from developed countries that gave development aid to those enterprises
Ø We in Nigeria want to build a national economy by among other things encouraging local fabrication of machines to hold the economy independent. In any way there are cheaper and more locally adaptive machines that can be sourced from the far East-Asian countries.
Ø We in Nigeria are very sorry that inspite of many years with WTO rules and regulations, the business communities are still unable to access foreign markets in traditional export items such as agricultural produce, textile and clothing, e.t.c
Ø Subsequently, the economy of Nigeria is still dominated by the oil sector as the non-export oil volume is up to now very low.
Ø Of great concern to public health is that Nigeria’s membership of the WTO has thrown the nations door wide open to the importation of foreign goods, and has made Nigeria a dumping ground for fake drugs from other countries. This is compounded by the restriction under intellectual property rights to patent our biological resources for our needs.
Ø Most of our industries in Nigeria have collapsed as the dumping of foreign goods has led to a large volume of unsold locally manufactured goods, thereby depressing the production volume of the manufacturing sector.
Ø In Nigeria, as in Brazil and South Africa we have tested a scientific mixture of local herbs that could be processed to manufacture Anti-Viral against HIV affordable to every Nigerian infected by the disease. But foreign pharmaceutical companies had already launched a campaign against this scientific test as contrary to international medicine standard. Although we remain silence on this matter, but we filed a dispute settlement long time ago.
Ø Finally, the position of Nigeria is that there is hardly any benefit being in the WTO, therefore we demand for total review of all the WTO Agreements.

3. CUBA
Ø The government and the people of Cuba are aware beyond any reasonable doubt that the WTO is the USA corporations dominated Organization to promote their interest of global domination and control of the economies of the developing countries
Ø The government of Cuba is in this body to monitor and opposed the sinister plan of those corporations against our economy
Ø It is a common knowledge to world community that the government of USA by a legislation – the Helms Birton Act- sectioned companies dealing with countries it does not like and the most victim being Cuba.
Ø In the same Act the USA penalized any Foreign firm with American property, doing business with people Republic of Cuba
Ø In the wake of deregulation and liberalization of trade, the USA export regulations relaxed controls on many countries but not Cuba
Ø On market access to developed countries Cuba is convinced that inspite of many years of WTO rules and negotiation, global liberalization of trade had not materialized. In order to allow “real and effective market opportunities”, the people of Cuba feel that future negotiations should take into account the need to develop a package of measures aimed at improving the national food security in developing countries, thus maintaining a high standard of living of the rural population.
Ø Cuba is of the view that the Agreement would be worthless if, at the end of it’s implementation, market access had been restricted. Indeed it is not relevant to contemplate any new commitment, if this problem had not been determined.
Ø Cuba is disturbed with increasing food insecurity in developing countries as a result of WTO multilateral trading system. The situation has become that if a country wants to pass laws that enable it to feed its people, and those laws are not consistent with so called free trade they are disallowed. Trade is thus given a higher priority than food.
Ø Further more, the Trips has become a stumbling block on food security as it has direct bearing on food production in particular and agriculture in general. This is because if a process to produce a plant is patented, the owner of the patent has exclusive right over the plants obtained using the process. Farmers are then forbidden the use of any seeds coming from such a plant.
Ø In a similar way the Trips undermines public health and medical research in general.
Ø Finally, we in Cuba do not subject our economy to these rules and regulations of the corporate managed trade under the WTO regime. About agriculture in particular our orientation is food security not agriculture for trade.
Ø And in order to avoid any embarrassment we have developed organic agricultural method and other local technologies to sustain our method of production.
Ø Lastly, in this ministerial conference we have to reflects over all the agreement under the WTO system with a view of renegotiating them again.

4. Zimbabwe
Ø When Zimbabwe attained it’s independence in 1980, there were high hopes for the country’s economic future
Ø It became one of the top four more industrilised countries in Sub-Saharan Africa; the food basket of Southern Africa; with diversified economy than most African Countries; there were considerable investment in social development; the economy itself grew.
Ø In 1990 the country embarked on an Economic Structural Adjustment Programme (ESAP). ESAP has the standard World Bank-IMF-WTO emphasis on trade liberalization. Farmers have been hit particularly hard. Government support for farmers has been drastically reduced- which in turn affected food output
Ø The WTO measures on Agreement on Agriculture became fully implemented. Zimbabwe commitment under AOA includes the removal of Import and Export subsidies, the removal of subsidies to be replaced by direct transfers and reduction of tariffs.
Ø Further more, domestic trade in all agricultural products except maize has been liberalized
Ø The consequence of all these is that a rapidly deteriorating economic climate descended on Zimbabwe. The people of Zimbabwe renamed the ESAP as “Extreme Suffering for African People’s Programme”.
Ø However, Zimbabwe has no other alternative but of a return to protectionist policies characterized by a reintroduction of price controls on some basic food items, tariff protection and exchange controls.
Ø Combine with the land occupation exercise this escalated conflict between Zimbabwe and the major imperialist nations and the Supra-national Organizations that managed the global economy on their behalf
Ø But the government of Zimbabwe, inspite of everything insisted on going ahead with the anti-liberalization measures.

ANNEX D
DISPUTE SETTLEMENT PROCESS
A central feature of WTO regime is it’s dispute settlement mechanism
It is a sort of juridical and legalistic system, whose decision comes out as a legal verdict and is binding on it’s members
Furthermore the process has had an enormous political and economic impact on global trade system and diplomacy.
However, the WTO dispute settlement system build upon the GATT dispute settlement procedures.
But the GATT system is more of a voluntary arbitration which allows for appeal in the world court in some circumstances.
Accordingly, at GATT system, disputes were settled at semi-annual meeting of the contracting parties. If this failed disputes were brought to inter-sessional committee of the parties and subsequently delegated to a working party and later to a panel of private individuals who have no interest with any of the parties.
Of course there are many problems of the GATT system, especially with interpretation of Article XVIII of the GATT regulations and the implementation of the verdicts.
Without solving all the problems associated with GATT, the dispute settlement understanding at the Uruguay Round improves over the GATT dispute settlement procedure by
a. Establishing unified dispute settlement instead of each agreement has its own.
b. All relevant legal texts of Uruguay Round becomes law applicable in resolving dispute
c. The rights of a complaining party to have a panel – without complain being blocked by other interest.
d. Indeed, a unique procedure emerged.
In the WTO regime dispute is only government versus government.
That is that every member has the right to settle differences with another member according to procedures of the WTO as elaborated in Dispute Settlement understanding.
The procedure begins if a request is made transmitted to the secretariat.
Then Dispute settlement number is assigned to the dispute. All documents about that dispute bear that number.
If more than one country brings complains on the same issues, they are consolidate as one.
The process starts with consultation. If the parties failed to settle within 60 days then dispute panel is established. The parties have to accept the panel. But if there are sharp differences on members of the panel the Director General has final say and all must accept.
The panel operates under terms of reference. It receives oral and written submission from the parties and from a third party if any.
After oral and written submissions from the parties, an interim report is written and given to the parties to make comment.
Then a final report is written and submitted to dispute settlement board for adoption. But appeal is allowed after which a final report is submitted which becomes binding on parties and other members
We hereby create a scenario of dispute between the government of Nigeria and the government of USA representing its pharmaceutical corporations in Nigeria.
The complainant is Nigeria. The ground of the complain is that one resourceful Nigerian-Dr Abalaka, a medical scientist and consultant based in Abuja tested and proved some local substances that could be used to process anti-virals to cure HIV Aids at very cheap price
The USA based pharmaceutical corporations through their government accused the government of Nigeria of
i. A report of a scientific investigation which is patented long time ago.
ii. Secondly, of agricultural resources that are already owned by some business corporate interests
iii. Thirdly, these are agricultural products found in the area the federal government of Nigeria gave to the white farmers of Zimbabwe who came with their farm enterprises to Nigeria – therefore under TRIMS these are not the rights of the government and people of Nigeria
iv. Fourthly, the government of Nigeria is accused of condoning attempt to violate WTO-DSU decision taken many years ago

Subsequently, the government of the USA threatened the federal government of Nigeria with a trade sanction if it allows Dr Abalaka to continue talking about his scientific investigation.
Thus, the federal government of Nigeria is forced to stop the campaign of Dr. Abalaka for Cheap anti-viral HIV AIDs Drugs
By this submission the FRN is demanding/praying for our national sovereignty, autonomous economic development and for no intervention in the public health of Nigerians.
Finally, we demand for reverse of all judicial decisions of the WTO system not favourable to demands above.

ANNEX E
WORKING GROUPS TOWARD PREPARING FOR THE MOCK SUMMIT
1. WTO Agreements
Umar Danjuma and Lawi Isa Abdullahi as co-chairman
2. Agreement On Agriculture
Hamza Marafa as Chairman
3. WTO and Regional Trade
Adamu Isma’il as Chairman
4. Non-Agricultural Market access
Shehu Haruna
5. Problems of Implementation
Murtala Garba
6. Agricultural trade and food security
Fararadden Abdulrahman Dodo
7. Dispute settlement understanding
Aliyu Zubairu and Yusuf Koroka
8. Institutional structure of WTO
Awwal Abubakar
9. The QUAD in the WTO System
Isma’il Galadima
10. Developing countries in the WTO
Umar Kabir
11. On Media
Sani Sabi’u
Sadiq Mahdi

ANNEX F
Ø By 9:00am the Venue will be set
Ø Then the audience and invited guests will be coming and got seated.
Ø While that is going on the delegates/participants too are coming around in their full regalia (hanging outside the venue).
Ø Meanwhile the media men are getting set with their instruments
Ø At appropriate time the BBC will start broadcasting news capturing that the WTO summit is now holding in Dakar-Senegal.


Ø Then the media would be showing, see the Director General arriving with his crew e.t.c
Ø These would be followed by delegates
Ø Then on the conference hall the Director General would be seen talking and making consultation, then he would announce that the minister of trade of Senegal will now take his seat as the chairman of the summit.
Ø By this time the agenda and some papers will be placed before the chairman.

Ø The head of state of Senegal is arriving.
Ø The Director General would now welcome the Head of State of Senegal and invite him to declare the conference open.
Ø This is by making speech.


Ø As soon as he finished and left with his entourage the chairman will start the agenda by calling the Director General to give opening remarks.
Ø Then to be followed by speech of the chairman
Ø After the speech the chairman would refer to the DG for report of committees. Then the reports would come one by one- Agriculture; Textile; TRIPS; Services
Ø After the reports the chairman will open the floor for comments by delegates-this would come by raising of hands and by the chairman recognizing one at a point.
Ø During the US trade representative speech, the demonstrators will come in and disrupt the summit, chanting slogan against WTO. However, the demonstrators will be blocked by having security men dispatched. The US trade representative will then continue.


Ø It is always better that there are disagreements. So that by the time each has spoken, the situation becomes very tense
Ø Then the floor would be open again for some countries to make assertions which would still appear more controversial.
Ø Then going to the green room would announced by the Chairman and who would go there with USA, EU, Canada; Japan and Director General to decide on the issues finally.


Ø Going to the green room would be vehemently opposed as undemocratic by delegates from developing countries.
Ø The final declaration will be read.
Ø Then the summit closes.