 of law especially on the international arena the way he takes and explains things and that to extemple that itself gives a pleasure not only to the mind's soul as well as the ears and it is always a fascinating fact to learn from him or you can speak extemple and amongst us we also have assistant professor Shivani Rajesh again from CMI University where Dr. Subramanya is the Dean of the law department and without taking much time I would request assistant professor Shivani to introduce some topic and then Dr. Subramanya can take things forward. Sure, thank you so much. So the topic for today is basically WTO and the Developing Countries. So we are essentially going to talk about what is exactly the scope of functioning of the World Trade Organization which is the WTO and along with that the second part of the lecture would concentrate on the specific issues faced by the developing countries in the entire arena of the WTO. So I would request professor Subramanya to carry out the first part of the lecture which is to talk about the World Trade Organization its scope and its establishment. Now when we take up the World Trade Organization many of you may not be knowing why it came in for what purpose it came in what exactly its functions under the present day legal system. Now there was an organization which was known as GATT which is popularly called as the General Agreements on Trade and Tariff. Now General Agreements on Trade and Tariff came to be established in the year 1947. Now this was actually to take care of the trade in goods of the members of the international community. So all the developed countries put together they came in they sat and they established a multilateral agreement which is called as the GATT. Now the GATT was functioning very effectively. All the GATT was functioning very effectively. One important drawback which the General Agreement on Trade and Tariff had was it had no implementing agency at all. The states by consensus would implement existing rules and with the results there was nobody to take care of anybody. So it was just like a situation wherein the rules were there and wherein the developed countries naturally used to brobeat others and things were going on. But then until 1960 or 70 up to 1970 I can say the World Trade Organization as the GATT General Agreements on Trade and Tariff was functioning very effectively. Thereafter what has happened was there were several issues that came up between the developed countries, between the developed countries and the developing countries, between the developing countries and the least developed countries. It was at this juncture. Somebody, some scholars, some statesmen, some philanthropists, everyone who are into international trade pleased that we should have a multilateral trade organization which is called as the WTO. When they wanted to have it the initiative came from the developed world. When the initiative came from the developed world especially the least developed countries and the developing countries were opposed to it. They thought that this is nothing but going to be a hegemonic rule and an introduction of new colonialism, new neo-colonialism in the developing world and the least developed world. So opposition was started because at that time when it started the communist regime was very powerful. On the one side you have we had the People's Republic of China and other Soviet Russia and this side you have the NATO group led by the state of United States and a few other countries which is called as the which are part of the Western European theater. But then the discussion began. The discussion began actually in the year 1986 on September 20th and when they began, when they started to discuss certain issues they wanted to reform the existing gas structure. So at that time they were just thinking about improve the trading services, how the trading goods can be improved upon. At that time the several other issues came in and one important issue happened to be trading intellectual property rights. Now what exactly are the conditions and the conditionalities that are to be observed by developing countries and the owner of the intellectual property then came agreement in services. Now you might be knowing several of our nationals go and work abroad. So in such a situation could there be a discrimination between a western national as well as a national from a least developed country like the state of Nepal. So Nepal is working everywhere and they are employed as good workers or watchmen. Now sadly that is being paid to them are very medium and they may be having good degrees from degrees good universities. Now how these things are to be sorted out was the question. So discussion began and as in the discussion began more more number of items many more unique sessions were added. But these were remember not only added but thrashed out at times much against opposition. There were discussions. There were as many as seven sessions that have been taught from 1886 to 1993. After the seventh session at the Marrakesh in the Turkish town or the Turkish city the agreement on World Trade Organization was signed. Now this is a World Trade Organization which are to be respected by everyone. It is a multilateral treaty regime. Under the multilateral treaty regime when a state becomes a party to a particular treaty it is supposed to carry out and execute the provisions in the treaty. Now why did the WTO came in I had just mentioned to you. Now what exactly are its objectives. Now objectives are essentially remember three. Now first one is to attain high levels of employment. Oh remember lots of people were without jobs and to such people there should be a position to find jobs. Then the other one full levels of employment. Then when I speak about full levels of employment it is naturally at every country people should be in a position to get and participate in the system and they get used to over a period of time they should get adjusted with such a system. Now the other important thing that is being spoken happened to be for the economic welfare. Now economic welfare remember you might be knowing many people would say poverty is always danger to prosperity and economic welfare of the developing countries in the least level of countries are to be reformed and it has to be streamlined. Protection of health environment all these factors were there even those days even in 1990s people were speaking about so these are to be reformed and everyone should get the benefit of the trade between countries or the objective. Now when I speak of this that what exactly are its purposes. Now when I speak about the purposes along with the objectives one is the entire WTO is dependent and based on what we call as non-discrimination. So when I speak about in trade there cannot be any discrimination between two states or more states or in state. So without discrimination the objectives of the WTO has to be carried forward throughout this is one. So the second non-discrimination means you cannot show discrimination between one state and another and you cannot give what we call as one treatment to one state another treatment to another this is not allowed under the WTO. There afterwards remember the other important thing is most favorable nation treatment. Now there are countries which may be interested to give most favorable nation treatment to one state. Now you've danced most nation treatment which is given to a particular state which has to be extended to the other states as well. So always remember when I speak of most favorable nation treatment a treatment which is given to a particular state has to be extended even if it is most favorable. Now there are certain exceptions to this for example you might be knowing that in Europe you have the Council of Europe, you have the free trade area, we have what we call to common transportation system, common agricultural system and other things. So at that time for the Europeans the European Council or the European Union may give special treatment but it cannot be claimed as of right by others. Other states are not entitled to claim it was the expression that is being visualized and that is being put under the WTO. Then the other one is competition trade always should take place with the equal competition and there cannot be any influence and overpowering the trading activities by one state against another. So these are the three objectives with the WTO came in. Now WTO came in and started functioning. Now what has happened was after the WTO came in the first I am just pointing out three or four drawbacks so that the issue can be raised at a later stage by our colleague. Now the first drawback which was analyzed by most of the scholars is although the WTO has done wonderful work. For example the WTO has what we call as important bodies which I just did not mention I shall just make a mention of it you briefly. One such body happened to be the ministerial conference. Ministerial conference happened to be the decision taking body and in which most of the trade and commerce ministers are represented. So this is the body which takes important decisions, policy decisions, policy matters are taken up by it. Now which means once in two years and afterwards you have the general council. In the general council all the members who are the WTO members of WTO are represented. Now today if the strength of WTO are nearing seven 170 states or more all of them are parties to the general council. The general council it takes important decisions during the absence of the ministerial conference because you can't convene the conference the trade ministers every time every alternative day. That is why the general council again is represented by states permanently seated there in Geneva takes care of these issues. Then the other one third one happened to be dispute settlement body. When I speak about the dispute settlement body there will be several trade disputes and these trade disputes have to be settled by an organ known as the dispute settlement body of WTO. Now for example I just made a mention the GATT was lacking in it and since the GATT was lacking in it they wanted to put in and see that it is being introduced all the way for a good purpose and it has done wonderful work. For example the dispute settlement body is important at rocket schools and these are important rules which will be submitted to the general council and later by the ministerial conference for purpose of approval and in the first I can tell you five years from 1995 1st January that is the WTO came into force between 200 in the five years it had decided 179 cases. It has resolved 179 cases and most of these cases are in favor of the developing countries taken this way. Now there are what we call as the trade policy review body. Now trade policy matters remember they are not constant and they are to be reviewed according to the circumstances and the exigencies. You might be knowing the trade policies so stayed during the COVID have remember completely changed and it has to be done it has to be tackled ultimately the life of people are more important than anything else that is why this organ naturally is an organ which is set up under the WTO. Now then they will have council for trading goods we have council for trading services we have council for trading intellectual property rights now these are the organs which are being set up under their WTO and the council for trading goods trading services trading intellectual property rights is the emperor to have their own rules they are empowered to have their own bodies and if they need changes they can adopt and get the approval of the general council which is composed of all the members and carry on then afterwards we have what we call as committee on trade and development. Now committee on trade and development is in again another organ under the WTO which deals with trade matters and developing it further over a period of time then we have committee on balance of payments and restrictions then we have committee on budget and finance see the committee on budget and finance naturally prepares the budget to the WTO the budget which is being prepared ultimately will have to be approved by the general council and then endorsed by what we call as the the a ministerial conference. Now these are certain things which naturally speaks about the bodies of the organs within the WTO now it has a secretary general the secretary general of the WTO already called as the director general he is appointed for a period of six years and this person is appointed for a period of six years by the ministerial conference all all he's the executive head and he's the administrative head and the staff of the WTO are recruited by the secretary general of the WTO and remember they have privileges and amenities both for example when they go they visit India or visit Africa visit some other countries naturally they are given privileges and amenities to the extent required for their efficient and smooth functioning that is what what is being pointed out under the charter of the WTO in addition to this when they function they employ the WTO or officials of the WTO when they function they are not supposed to take orders from any state they are remember gone by the WTO and loyalty to the institution and they cannot listen and execute any orders which is given by the concerned state they are because it is an international organ and they are international servants the law which is being applicable to the international servants is applicable to the servants of WTO as well now all these things are there for the promotion and protection of world trade now one major criticism which I just wanted to speak to you happened to be the linkages issue now if the WTO has come in to promote to protect and to see that the world trade is being improved bilaterally multilaterally or trilaterally why the an organ like WTO should speak about issues like ILO international labour organization is there which is being established in the year 1921 since 1921 the international labour organization has been functioning very effectively very efficiently essentially and efficiently now you might be knowing those students who have studied labour law at least know the international labour organization thus far has adopted 189 conventions it has adopted as many as 202 resolutions and when such a thing is being done of taking care of the labour problems throughout the world of member nations why an institution like World Trade Organization the purpose for which is this appointed is to take care of world trade only why it is meddling with the labour problems or states and imposing conditions of labour this is most untenable that was one of the criticisms that came first that is why now unions are cracking up because of the world standards for WTO's interference in the trade matters now then the other one is why a world trade organization should take care or interfere in the matters relating to environment you have a specialized agency United Nations environment program United Nations environment program came as early as 1972 and it is functioning in Kenya as an effective specialized agency for the promotion and protection of environment most of the environmental law conventions are adopted by the United Nations environment program so when such a thing is there why WTO as an organ established for the promotion and protection of trade throughout the world should interfere in matters pertaining to environmental issues now the third issue happened to be remember World Health Organization you have an organ known as the World Health Organization which has a constitution of its own which has a director of its own it is functioning very efficiently and during COVID period you have seen how attempts it failed miserably but the point for our point is when you have a health organization as a specialized agency appointed by the United Nations to take care of the health standards or the medicinal standards WTO should not poke why it is poking its nose in health matters that is not allowed this is another criticism that is being spoken now the other one that is being spoken is now you have intellectual property rights issues and the WTO is meddling especially the big powers meddle in the enforcement of intellectual property treaties maybe the Bernay Convention of 1883 1886 and other conventions which are being adopted in the recent past after its commencement now when we have in the United Nations have established an organization by name World Intellectual Property Organization which is called as the WIPO which has started functioning in 1967 itself where is the need for an organ which is established for the promotion and production of trade like WTO to interfere in matters like the world intellectual property rights now when we discuss intellectual property rights I just intend to bring home a few of the important issues now the first issue happened to be you might be knowing world the intellectual property is the creation of the mind because of the ingenuity of the scholar naturally for what he has done he is being protected and when he is given the protection remember always you might be knowing it will it should be used for public welfare now in the majority of the cases I am just giving you only points not beyond that in intellectual property matters most of the inventions which are being done by scholars like us sitting whole day in the library, whole day in the lab are being purchased by the multinational corporations suppose for example here is a scholar who is working there and when he applies a patent when he gets the patent and the moment he gets the patent when it is registered there will be a beeline of multinational corporations they will approach him they will talk to him and afterwards quietly remember they will pay some money and take the intellectual property and there afterwards he is for a partner and the patent will be the name of the company what the company can do and the company will be making profits of profits huge profits and the inventor is an incognito he is not even remember and the other thing is any intellectual property when it is done public welfare criteria must be taken care now you might be knowing public health public safety especially in medicines and then right to health right to medicine right to food these are the matters which have to be taken into consideration by a trade organization if it interferes with intellectual property now what has happened was the human rights commission the subcommission on human rights of the united nations in 2000 submitted a report and when it submitted a report it went to the strength of pointing out all the all the WTO rules and regulations are against intellect basic human rights all the rules which are framed by WTO in 2000 according to the human rights commission is against basic human rights now you may be interested to know what are these human rights now you know article 21 of the constitution of India and article 21 of the constitution is India being developed on day to day basis as and when the cases go before the Supreme Court of India now one important thing is right to life is a fundamental right but then they said right to life means and includes right to food then right to medicine right to health right to safe drinking water now all of them remember right to food no suppose for example you need a package of food and actual cost is five rupees but then you have to pay 500 rupees and you pay intellectual property and remember these are directly credited to the company and you are not going to get it and right to medicine I can just give you one instance and look into right to medicine there was a friend of mine because I was working in Bahrain and remember when I came back to India one fine morning I get a call from him and he said he has admitted his wife in the Manipal hospital then I asked him what is the problem then he said the kidney transplantation and remember he was in the Manipal hospital and once I went and saw him afterwards when I went there he gave me a bill and remember this bill naturally at that time I'm telling of the story of 2002 it was costing 162000 and then I asked him what is this about then I said it is not relating to kidney that is more more than 10 lakhs transplantation this is a particular medicine remember this is an injective medicine which is going to be administered to the patient and this is when the kidney is kept inside the place where it should be kept remember after keeping it the patient is not supposed to get a burp for 24 hours minimum and remember if the candidate the patient if he gets a burp after its transplantation now the kidney will slip away from the place where it is being kept and ultimately the patient will die now remember just to see that the kidney should remain wear it wear for 24 hours you have to give one injection which costs one lakhs 162000 I am just telling you how many other people of this country are capable of spending one lakhs 62000 on medicines like this and later remember casually I was asking a doctor I just told him because some of my relatives a doctor and just asked him what is this like no at best or at best it may cost about 5000 rupees what is the profit you are making if the cost of medicine is actually 5000 rupees and you are making a profit of how many 100% this is not where is the public welfare criteria now that will be I will give you another illustration another illustration happen to be an illustration especially in one one illustration happened to be an illustration in Thailand and in the state of Thailand what has happened was one year there were plenty of patients who died out of AIDS and at that time the American company introduced the medicine there the capsule and the kit and then remember it was very expensive very expensive and the Thai government led by the king they decided that locals would manufacture this drug and the drug which was manufactured locally and it was damn cheap maybe entire kit maybe of 100 dollars or so and whereas this drug which was prepared by the Americans was costing nearly 2000 dollars to save the patient not to save the patient but to save them completely once for all this is what has happened and when they manufacture the drug Thais local drug was manufactured to prevent AIDS in the state of Thailand the American government used to the WTO and by using the WTO they said we will put a ban on trade because Thailand is essentially dependent upon 25% of its trade on Thailand is this the way you back my is this the way you defeat the very object for with the organization has come now another instance I wanted to tell you the in the African continent for about five years the entire continent was infected with the aid now at that time what has happened was the multinational the companies who manufacture drugs on preventing AIDS go to the spot having gone to the spot they convinced the heads of states of Africa majority of them that we will prepare an AIDS kit and the AIDS kit which is going to be manufactured by the multinational companies will cost you about 12,000 to 14,000 dollars per annum for one person one patient hit with the AIDS you have to spend 12,000 dollars to 14,000 now the African countries agreed because they have to save the patients because they are national now in situations like this remember they spent their per capita income at times is for some countries not even $50 a country is per capita is $50 has to spend remember 14,000 dollars for one year per person to get out of AIDS but at that time what has happened was some Indian firms and some Asian firms go to the African spot and having gone to the spot they had examined this drug and the kit which is being prepared by the multinational corporations in the west and they came to know there is nothing you know they said we are going to give you the same kit with $220 so they started and it started gaining remember currency and all the African countries started buying Indian goods now at that time remember these western multinational corporations imposed trade embargo on the other drug companies which is known which is a fact which nobody tells now what is it that you are doing and articles appeared and where is $200 or $220 and where you have remember 14,000 to $15,000 per person at that time some of the business magnates multinational corporations and heads and directors and general managers in the press corridor and said we are not bishops into business what is this statement we are not bishops into business you can understand their meaning and they went on carrying this but then it had to be stopped and stopped now another year what has happened was there is a state known as Gautamala which is called the banana republic and in the banana republic remember 1.5 million 15 lakhs of children of young age used to die every year they used to die because of diarrhea they used to die because of diarrhea because the mothers always used to feed these children with an infant formula supplied by United States the infant formula which is given by the United States was the best formula which is substituted natural mother's milk now because of that remember it was at times contaminated and it was not properly tested and it was prepared locally with the local waters which was again contaminated now in such situations Gautamala just remember requested the authorities to prepare a remember a medicine for themselves and local authorities started preparing and sending and when they prepared they prepared in accordance with the 1982 WHO criteria world health organization in the year 1982 adopted a resolution and later it became a convention like all the countries are supposed to adopt this formula that is breast milking substitutes are not allowed to remember canvass and publicize and give publicity this is the first thing and accordingly the manufacturer and it came and it started marketing when they started marketing the american company said remember the formula ad which is given by you is a copy from the american company and we are going to sue you withdraw it immediately and if you don't withdraw it will not give you any money by way of aid so remember they did they got aids but did not get aid and even the ad which was given had to be taken back these are certain situations which are being spoken whether the WTO is doing right or wrong now other important aspect which I just wanted to bring home happened to be under the vnr convention the ozone layer and the material protocol on ozone layer adopted in 1985 and 87 it is the responsibility of the developer countries to help the needy to help the poor and to see that there will be ozone free air and with the result as in the convention came in one multinational company from the state of india wanted to approach another multinational company in the state of united states india indian multinational company approved the state of united states only to get some technology to see that remember cfc free machines are introduced into the refrigerators and air conditions so if you go to some electric shop you find the on the refrigerator it is being put cfc free that means it has the invention which is being put inside now when the indian company approached the multinational company the state of united states the company said we are prepared to give the technology but give us 25 million dollars the writer points out in any circumstances from any angle if you examine the value will not exceed beyond 2 billion dollars whatever it is what is the profit you are making and is this the business criteria and the way of functioning and you are only after making money but not the welfare of the common man doesn't matter even if the world perishes you want to survive these are certain instances and the criticisms that is being spoken now another aspect which i just intend to highlight happened to be remember there are certain defects in the existing intellectual property rights itself as pointed out by some scholars now to get a patent you should have what we call as novelty then invent your step and the most important thing is its applicability industrial applicability so invent you first is it should be new novelty no one will have done it earlier the second one is invent your step you should be able to give the invent your step you might be knowing there is a person by name raman maraar and raman maraar from temillan he went to the extent of pointing out he will prepare diesel out of some what we call as harm and with the result it is the cost of diesel is not 75 rupees it will be five rupees but then remember he called the concerned people from the government of india they came and remember he put the what we call as medicinal herbal which is supposed to be an oil but then the engine did not start much less it ran twice it happened then they warned and don't call us now what is it because that means it was not i did not have the invent to step at all it's only his hallucination and imagination and novelty it should be new industrial application that is the third one now the point it is at issue is some scholars point out whether it is novelty or invent your step or industrial applicability are not properly defined so it is the duty of the concerned states whenever they draw or draft a law to give remember explanation what exactly it means that is not being done now the other important thing is you have another defect in this discovery and invention is not going spoken defined properly now since what is discovery what is invention it is not spoken properly since it is not highlighted properly remember life forms have been given IPRs today you know diamond versus chakravarti a case which came up afterwards life forms are expected accepted given patents now these are a few of the things which i just wanted to bring home and even in the WTO dispute settlement mechanism you might be knowing you the trade of our country is not in favor with the state of united states now naturally the state of united states will try to use all means this is must against what we call as the treaty on WTO which is not supposed to be practiced by a state like i'm not saying anything whereby developed states so there are certain although WTO has done lots and lots of things now lots and lots of things remember are unfavorable things are as well found within the WTO system now i ask request shivaani to take up the issue thank you so much sir just to check am i audible yeah okay so i would like to thank uh uh supramanya sir for uh you know setting up the platform so well uh i think the theme of the entire lecture which was a critical analysis of the WTO from the point of developing countries has been put forth very effectively uh what i am going to deal with is i'm going to deal with the problems relating to WTO from two major perspectives one is the perspective of the current crisis which is being faced at the WTO level uh relating to the trips and public health issue which is a specific analysis from the point of view of covid 19 and the second one is from an institutional perspective wherein i will evaluate the effectiveness of dispute settlement understanding which is considered to be one of the most successful dispute settlement mechanism from the point of view of developing countries in the sense whether this institution is being beneficial for the developing countries or not moving on to my first analysis with respect to trips and public health i would like to pick up from where uh professor supramanya stopped with respect to the issues of how with respect to trips it's essentially an agreement which lays down minimum standards for adoption of intellectual property regime in every country so in other words if you are a member of the WTO you automatically are the signatory to the trips agreement that is the trade related intellectual property rights agreement and once you become a member of the WTO and thereby the signatory to the trips you automatically agree to confirm with the minimum standards of IP protection which is required by trips which is the reason why most of the WTO members are supposed to have a well-established intellectual property regime in their own domestic laws so automatically trips will not be applicable but trips will be applicable once it is adopted in the domestic legislation and the obligation for every country to adopt intellectual property regime in their domestic legislation is provided for by the trips now when we talk about compulsory adoption of intellectual property regime in a domestic legislation the question that comes to our mind is we are compulsorily asking every country to follow the capitalist path of private rights for the protection of intellectual property and this is to a certain extent not in agreement with some of the country's own domestic policies which give more importance to public interest and not as much to private interest and this is where the entire debate between trips and public health comes into picture in the sense if we agree to implement the trips agreement to its fullest we are to a certain extent letting go our own policy of public interest over private rights when it comes to intellectual property now this debate has been going on since a very long time it has been going on since the inception of the WTO itself when the trips agreement was negotiated and adopted in fact one of the points that professor Subramanya said with respect to linkages of non-trade issue with WTO one of the arguments against trips was that IPR is not related to trade because IPR was already being governed by the World Intellectual Property Organization that is the WIPO however the developed countries wanted to bring an IPR obligation under the ambit of the WTO majorly to take advantage of the dispute settlement understanding which is provided for under the WTO because under the WIPO even though various conventions such as Paris Convention, Bern Convention, Rome Conventions had been adopted by that time by 1995 when WTO came into existence there was no implementation mechanism under either of these conventions to impose or to implement the obligations which are provided under them which is why it is the argument of most of the developing country proponents that the entire issue of IPR was brought in the ambit of WTO in the first place to take advantage of the implementation mechanism which is the dispute settlement understanding. Now when this happened most of the developed countries started complaining against the developing countries who had not adopted the minimum standards regime under the trips agreement which is why most of the countries one of the major examples is India itself in the sense that India had very limited intellectual property rights protection in our country because as I said we are a socialist economy to a certain extent and we wanted to give more importance to public interest than private rights but because of the trips agreement we had to undertake or we had to implement certain more stringent regime under our own intellectual property rights legislations in order to be in agreement with the WTO obligations. So this is one of the major problems which is being faced at the trips from the point of view of the fact that most of the developing and the least developed countries want to give more importance to public interest they want to give more importance for example they don't want absolute protection for copyright they want legitimate use in the form of educational purposes which was what was held in the Indian case of Rameshwari photocopy as well. Other instance is they want to give more importance to public health than the individual private rights of the pharmaceutical companies when important life-saving drugs are developed and this is where I come to the major issue which is going on to the WTO right now with respect to intellectual property rights and COVID-19. In the current scenario in with the advent of COVID-19 a lot of problems have been going on from the trade perspective one of the major problem is equitable and affordable access to COVID essentials and when I say COVID essentials I obviously mean the vaccines I also mean drugs which are necessary to cure the COVID to cure COVID I also mean various diagnostic and therapeutic tools such as masks ventilators oxygen the oximeter which we get all of this is essentially what I'm going to talk about. Now this entire COVID essentials including the vaccines including the drugs have all been developed by big pharmaceutical companies who are housed in developed countries all these developed countries have very strict IPR regime in their own countries and this faces or this poses a major problem for the other countries to get equitable and affordable access to these COVID essentials. Now the problem here is the only way to deal with the COVID-19 virus is if we concentrate on the entire world getting better unlike the HIV virus which was something which happened earlier HIV was very limited to a particular region most of the countries which were African countries were affected by this virus which is why we did not or at the WTO level not much discussion took place when equitable and affordable access to drug with respect to HIV was needed but now that COVID-19 has affected the entire world the issue of equitable and affordable access to COVID essentials is something which is extremely important and this equitable and affordable access is being hampered this aim is being hampered because of intellectual property regimes strict intellectual property regime which exists in most of the developing countries the major intellectual property right which I am talking about here is definitely the patent because vaccines drugs most of the diagnostic and therapeutic tools the way to manufacture these products is something which is protected under the patent law in each of these developed countries the other thing that I'm talking about is also other ideas such as for example masks so if you look at the n95 masks the design of the n95 mask has been protected under the industrial design legislations of various countries which is why if tomorrow an Indian country decides to design an n95 mask it cannot copy the same design as is already protected under some other countries industrial designs legislation now this private right importance which is given in such a grave circumstance is of a major problem because if we consider the private rights of these pharmaceutical companies in the developed countries as the most important thing then we are directly relying on the manufacturing capacity of these pharmaceutical companies to provide the covid essentials for the rest of the world for the whole population of the world which may or may not happen and in the current trend which is going on it is not happening these pharmaceutical companies in the developed countries who own the intellectual property rights to various covid essentials are not able to manufacture that particular product for the entire world which is obviously understandable now considering that this cannot happen the next option that we have is to scale up production all over the world so whoever has the manufacturing capacity to manufacture that particular product be it vaccine be it remdesivir be it fabiflu be it oxymeters every country every manufacturer should start manufacturing it so that the production increases with the increase in production the supply will increase with the increase in supply equitable distribution and affordable distribution is possible but any and every manufacturer around the world who has the capacity to manufacture these products cannot manufacturing manufacture it because he might come within the ambit of intellectual property rights violation he might adopt a similar process or he might develop a similar product to deal with the particular issue at hand that is the covid-19 virus and if he does that he can be sued at the international level by another pharmaceutical company who has a patent or any other intellectual property over that particular product and this is the major problem which is going on at the WTO now the problem of public health and IPR as I told you is not a recent one it has been happening since a very long time and there are certain flexibilities flexibilities in the sense that certain situations in which the obligations need not be fulfilled to the maximum there are certain circumstances in the form of flexibilities which are provided for under the trips but these are not enough if we look into the specific aspect of these flexibilities we realize that these flexibilities are also designed in order to forward the interest of the developed countries itself to give you a very simple example the flexibility of compulsory licensing I'm sure all of us are thinking about compulsory licensing when I am saying that intellectual property is proving to be a major impediment for equitable and affordable access to covid essentials however a limitation of compulsory licensing first of all is that compulsory licensing is specifically related to patents and as I told you intellectual property rights which is hampering the equitable distribution of covid essentials is not just patents it is also copyright because if I for example if I design a ventilator the design can be protected under industrial designs or copyright but copyright and industrial designs legislations do not have the compulsory licensing exceptions that exception is only provided for in patents in addition to this the compulsory licensing requirement which is provided for under the trips is also very stringent in the sense that there are various conditions to name those to number those conditions there are 12 specific conditions which need to be fulfilled before a compulsory license is granted in with respect to a patent now in short compulsory licensing means that the manufacturer who is the licensee the potential licensee does not have to take the permission of the exclusive right holder in order to manufacture the product he can simply come within the ambit of compulsory licensing however trips mentions or trips requires that first of all this particular issue of compulsory licensing should be decided on a case-to-case and a product-to-product basis which means that every single manufacturer who wants to manufacture that product under the compulsory licensing regime because the product might already be protected under some intellectual property regime every time every manufacturer wants to take advantage of that he has to apply for it and his application will not be decided just on the basis of okay you are trying to manufacture a COVID essential and this COVID essential is protected under intellectual property regime which is why you get the compulsory licensing no it will be decided on a case-to-case basis which essentially means that a lot of time is going to be consumed and in the COVID problem that we are facing time is of essence and we can't afford to lose time the more time we lose in attaining this aim of equitable and affordable distribution of resources the more lives are being claimed because of COVID right so that is one of the major problem another problem with the compulsory licensing regime is that there are many countries around the world who don't have the manufacturing capacity to manufacture the products at all for example a country like India is doing very well with respect to its pharmaceutical sector but a country like Bangladesh or all of the African countries for that matter do not have the necessary capacity in their own domestic area to manufacture the same COVID essentials now because of the lack of their own capacity these countries have to depend upon other countries who will who will make use of the compulsory licensing regime and manufacture the same products at probably a cheaper rate right and that is exactly what professor Subramanya was also saying that the HIV drug which was being transferred to Africa for a very long time which was manufactured by the US company was available at an exorbitant rate and an Indian manufacturer a pharmaceutical manufacturer was able to manufacture the same drug at a cheaper rate so what Africa did was Africa had to depend upon the Indian manufacturer to import the drug because the US manufacturer was exporting it at a very exorbitant price but here is where the problem of compulsory licensing comes it says that whichever country issues a compulsory license has to use it predominantly for domestic purposes which means that let's say tomorrow the vaccine AstraZeneca let's say a generic pharmaceutical company in India is able to manufacture a similar product like the AstraZeneca vaccine Covishield and they have applied for compulsory licensing the Indian manufacturer even if the manufacturer is able to manufacture a huge amount of Covishield vaccine the Indian manufacturer under a compulsory licensing regime cannot export it he has to use it at the domestic level and this is a problem because this leads to the other country suffering because a country like Africa which itself does not have the manufacturing capacity so it cannot make use of compulsory licensing it cannot afford to buy the drug from the US company who is the original patent holder of that particular drug and now because of the condition under the compulsory licensing regime it cannot buy the drug from India either even though India is manufacturing it legally under a compulsory licensing regime and even though India is having the capacity to manufacture it at a large scale this is another problem with respect to compulsory licensing there are many further problems relating to compulsory licensing such as if at all a grant of compulsory license is done various measures have to be undertaken such as it has to be ensured that the product which is manufactured is manufactured at a limited scale it should not happen that you profit out of the manufacturing of that product you have to use it in a very limited manner for public purpose there is also another requirement which says that clear identification of the product as a compulsory licensed product has to be provided so the trademark which is used has to be different the color of the product has to be different the the nature of the product has to be different because of all these requirements most of the pharmaceutical companies are discouraged from applying these compulsory licensing regime because from the point of view of any pharmaceutical company let's say an Indian pharmaceutical company who wants to take advantage of compulsory licensing their main aim is not humanitarian purposes humanitarian purposes could be the aim of the government but the pharmaceutical company who is obtaining the compulsory license will want to use it for commercial purposes and their commercial extent to use that compulsory licensing is limit limited because of these administrative requirements which are provided for under the compulsory licensing regime in the TRIPS agreement which is why the pharmaceutical companies once again irrespective of having a chance to manufacture it under the compulsory licensing regime irrespective of having the capacity to manufacture it under the compulsory licensing regime are discouraged from applying that particular measure because of the fact that it is not profitable for them so ultimately we realize that even though there are flexibilities available under TRIPS to ensure that the debate between TRIPS and public health is resolved the actual debate is not resolved because of the fact that the way in which these compulsory licensing regimes are implemented or are affected are in a manner which once again falls within the benefit of the pharmaceutical companies itself because the other companies who have the option of compulsory licensing are discouraged from using it because of the possibility of non-commercial use correct so this is one of the major problems in addition to this currently what is happening at the WTO is there is a proposal which is made by India and South Africa for the waiver of intellectual property rights with respect to COVID essentials which means that considering there are so many problems because of IPR and COVID there is absolute impediment on equitable distribution of resources and affordable distribution of resources and considering the fact that even the flexibilities the existing flexibilities of compulsory licensing which is given under the TRIPS is not enough to deal with the problem India and South Africa have demanded for an absolute waiver of IPR protection related to limited products so they have basically named things such as vaccines drugs diagnostic and therapeutic tools and other related items which is going to help us overcome the problem of COVID-19 now the good point is most of the developing countries are supporting this waiver proposal because the developing countries understand the issue and they understand their own problems their own public interest problems which are being hurt because of private property rights of intellectual property however most of the developed countries are not in favor of this waiver USA is not completely in favor of it however USA has agreed to relax their IPR protection regime with respect to vaccines alone however considering the problem that we are facing vaccines alone are not going to be the solution because even if we decide to vaccinate the entire population of India even if we have the manufacturing capacity the administrative capacity and the the local capacity itself is very limited to vaccinate the entire population on at a large scale right in addition to that there are many news articles which are coming up which are saying that the new variants of COVID are not effective in in are able to affect a person who has taken a vaccine as well so even though you have been protected by a vaccine there is every possibility that you might be affected by the new variants of COVID which is why India and South Africa are firm on their stance that they want a waiver with respect to all products not just vaccines with respect to drugs as well with respect to other things such as masks as well which are protected under the Industrial Designs Act and with respect to other diagnostic tools as well now other thing which I want to talk about the waiver is basically the argument of European Union European Union is one of the major opponents of this waiver and European Union is of a view that the waiver is going to affect the innovative capacity of the pharmaceutical companies the age old argument from the point of view of IPR protection that IPR helps in promoting innovation it helps in promoting the or it helps in encouraging the pharmaceutical companies to come up with new drugs and European Union is also paying a lot of attention to the speed with which the vaccine has been developed which is definitely commendable I'm not at all you know argument there's no argumentation with respect to that however there is also another problem here why we cannot completely rely on the intellectual property regime and the problem is that of this issue of vaccine nationalism now vaccine nationalism is something which is very specifically happening all over the world right now where in most of the developed countries are entering into agreements directly with pharmaceutical companies the government is entering into an agreement with a company wherein and the company is still at the trial stage and it has happened in the past as well and it's happening now as well when the company is at the stage of trial of that particular vaccine it's not approved by the FDA it is still at the stage of trial at this stage itself the company is being approached by the governments of developed countries and these governments are promising some remuneration to these pharmaceutical companies in exchange for a bulk order of vaccines so if the trial is successful and if the FDA approval is given to that particular vaccine the vaccine will be a bulk order of that vaccine will be directly transferred to the developed country the government with which this particular agreement has been entered into now this is a major major problem because first of all it is extremely inequitable right because a country like Bangladesh or a country like Vietnam will never be able to enter into a profitable agreement with these pharmaceutical companies because they don't have the monetary capacity to enter into these agreements in the first place to procure a huge bulk order of vaccine so it's extremely inequitable only the developed and the rich countries will be able to do this second of all it also as soon as a bulk order is promised to one government it automatically limits the other governments or other people of other countries to get their hands on that particular vaccine so this vaccine nationalism is a one major problem which will be solved by the IPR waiver because as soon as the waiver is declared no country has to give protection to any intellectual property they don't have to think about being taken an action against for using another person's intellectual property only for a limited period of time that is of three years which is mentioned in the waiver proposal and only with respect to limited products those products which are necessary to deal with COVID-19 that's it it's not a complete waiver of the IP regime another problem which is which has to be taken into consideration before we look into the benefits of IPR here is the problem of the fact that major governments of the world are supporting their pharmaceutical companies monetarily to develop the vaccines so one of the arguments of Europe is that if we give this waiver now in the future pharmaceutical companies will not be willing to develop products for dealing with future problems it could be that the delta variant is itself the future problem right because the current vaccines are not able to protect the person from delta variant but the argument from the developing country's perspective is that that won't happen because of the fact that many governments of the world have promised money or they have supported the pharmaceutical companies financially in order to develop the vaccine for example according to many studies which have been conducted the US government is supposed to have donated for the lack of a better word donated around 18 to 20 billion dollars to the pharmaceutical companies to various pharmaceutical companies only so that these pharmaceutical companies can continue their efforts in developing the COVID-19 vaccine now here is where the entire problem arises when we say that intellectual property protection should be given we are talking about intellectual property protection from the point of view of the investment which is done to develop a particular intellectual property it could be monetary investment by the pharmaceutical company or it could be the intellectual investment which is done by the pharmaceutical companies itself but the question that arises is do we need to uphold intellectual property rights when these intellectual properties developed not only on the basis of the pharmaceutical companies might but also with the help of the government to a certain extent it becomes a public property and because of that the entire argument is raised by the developing country that we cannot use the age-old reason that intellectual property promotes innovation in this regard because the COVID-19 situation is completely different from the rest of the problems that we are facing with respect to trips and public health now having talked about this particular issue which is in existence right now with respect to trips and public health I would like to talk about another problem which exists at the WTO level when we compare it with the developing country's perspective which is more of an institutional problem the problem that I just talked about trips and public health was more of an issue based problem right now we are facing a problem of COVID-19 which is where the existing WTO framework is not able to help us but there is another problem which is an institutional problem that is irrespective of the COVID-19 pandemic irrespective of any of the problems there is an institutional problem at the WTO level with respect to dispute settlement mechanism whereby the developing countries are put at a disadvantageous position now before I go on to talk about the agreements with respect to this particular issue I would like to state a few statistics now if we look at a particular research which was done in the year 2015 this research essentially talks about a quantitative analysis of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism in this research they had conducted a research on how many cases have been filed before the WTO dispute settlement mechanism who has filed the cases who was able to benefit from the cases majoritarily and what exactly is the statistical analysis of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism in this it was found out till 2015 this is 20 years since the establishment of the WTO and the dispute settlement body from 1995 to 2015 USA alone which is a developed country at the WTO level USA had filed 114 complaints at the WTO level USA is shortly followed by the European Union which has filed around 97 complaints at the WTO level after EU that is European Union there is Canada which has filed around 58 cases we realize that the difference is too much USA has filed 114 cases EU has 97 cases and Canada has 57 cases the situation becomes even worse where in fifth place there is Brazil which has filed only 31 complaints at the WTO level Brazil is closely followed by India who has filed only 23 cases at the WTO dispute settlement level now the problem is these five countries that I just named are the top five countries who usually are involved in some kind of a dispute at the WTO level and these top five countries include two developing countries which is a great thing but the developed countries are filing complaints as much as 114 and 97 whereas the developing countries are hardly able to file 31 and 23 complaints respectively right this is something that raises an alarm right that why are the developing countries not filing as many complaints in addition to this if we look at the same research the research basically says that developed countries the total number of developed countries at the WTO are 25 percent so 25 percent of the total WTO membership is developed countries this is a very small number if you try to compare with the entire WTO membership but this 25 percent of the WTO members that is a developed countries have accounted for 57 percent of the consultation the consultation is the first stage of dispute settlement at the WTO level they have accounted for 56.7 percent of the panel report the panel report is the again for a lack of a better explanation the original jurisdiction of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism so panel reports only the developed countries constitute 56.7 percent of the countries who are named in a panel report as a respondent or a complainant and they account for 62.7 percent of the appeals at the WTO level so a very small number of countries 25 percent of the WTO membership the developed countries are involved in maximum WTO cases now if you compare this with the developing country statistics developing countries account for 53 percent of WTO membership which is double the developing developed countries however if we look at their performance at the WTO dispute settlement mechanism level they account for only 42.7 percent of the consultation they account for only 43 percent of the panel request and only 37 percent of their cases the developing countries cases go before the appellate board now this is once again a major cause of concern we realize that 25 percent of WTO membership is is resulting in more or less 60 percent on an average of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism cases but the 53 percent of the membership which is more or less the majority are not having as much involvement in the WTO dispute settlement mechanism the situation becomes even worse when we look at the least developed countries there are in total the least developed countries constitute for 22 percent of the WTO membership once again relatively low but till now only one case has been come from a least developed countries which has stopped at the consultation level itself it has not even reached the original jurisdiction and the appellate jurisdiction of the WTO dispute settlement mechanism right this is a problem and this problem essentially highlights a major concern that even though the WTO dispute settlement mechanism is considered to be the crown jewel of the world trade organization there might be a possibility that it is not working for the developing countries and it is only catering to the needs of the developed countries right uh there are a number of reasons for the entire skewed perspective of the involvement of developed countries and developing countries at the WTO dispute settlement mechanism uh these problems I have divided into two categories the first one is capacity constraints now capacity constraints basically mean that even though the rules of the WTO are very impressive uh it is also said that considering that before the existence of WTO and also the GATT for that matter trade used to happen on the basis of political alliance so if I'm a friend with your country your country will engage in trade with me if I'm your enemy I will not conduct trade with you this problem was solved to a very great extent because of WTO because WTO brought about a rule based mechanism for conducting international trade and if we look into it setting up rules is always more beneficial for the weaker person because the stronger person that is countries such as USA, European Union, Canada, Mexico all of these were already at a very good position they were having very strong political allies and they were conducting trade successfully but countries which belong to the developing countries and least developed status they were the ones who technically benefited out of this rule based mechanism that was the claim of the WTO right but here we see that because of these specific rules which was supposed to help the developing countries these specific rules actually caused a lot of capacity constraints on behalf of the developing and least developed countries in the sense that the WTO dispute settlement mechanism has a very straightforward way of deciding disputes however the disputes have to still be fought by the countries they have to put in immense resources human resources as well as monetary resources in order to fight the cases in order to put forth their points successfully and in order to win that particular argument and this is where the problem arises against the developing countries because the developed countries who are also rich from the point of view of monetary capacity they are able to pull in a lot of resources human as well as monetary in order to fight their case at the WTO level however the developing and the least developed countries are not able to do the same they are not able first of all they don't have the capacity itself because if we look at India as well I think in the beginning of this lecture professor Mr. Vikas said that it's a very niche area so we realize that even in a country like India which is doing amazingly well at the trade level not a lot of people are aware about the international trade laws at in the first place which is where the human capacity constraint exists second of all with respect to the cost constraints once again there was a research which was conducted in in the year 2015 itself which essentially mentioned that for successfully completing a dispute of medium complexity the complexity could be high it could be very low or it could be medium for a medium complexity dispute to complete it that means consultation panel and appellate body to complete it it costs around five hundred thousand US dollars which is just one case now this is a big big amount from a cost perspective for the develop developing countries right because the developing countries are already the belonging to the lower middle income group or the the poor countries perspective and for them to fight every case which is going to cost approximately five hundred thousand US dollars is something which is not at all feasible in the first place which could be the reason why we see that the developing countries are not faring as well at the dispute settlement mechanism level another problem which arises here is the problem of the fact that at the dispute settlement mechanism level a private body cannot file a complaint a private member cannot approach the dispute settlement mechanism now the problem that the reason why I consider this as a problem is because of the fact only countries which is backed by a proper governmental ministry agreement only a country can file a dispute or or fight a dispute at the WTO dispute settlement mechanism but if we look at the trade which is taking place trade is not taking place by the countries trade is taking place between private members for example if we look at pharmaceutical trade trade is taking place between companies like Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca or a serum institute of India the private members are the ones who are importing and exporting but these private members cannot protect their interests at the WTO level it is only compulsorily the country which can file the case at the WTO level now this is in one way a very good thing because it reduces complexity if we allow private members to file cases it's going to become very complex but at the same time it is also true that if these private members are allowed to protect their own interests there is a possibility of better performance at the dispute settlement level for developing countries but now in the current circumstances because the government has to take the initiative the government is already riddled with a lot of problems when we talk about a developing country even India for that matter trade to a certain extent takes a back seat when we look at the other issues which the government is dealing with and that is one of another major problem that lack of the possibility of a private member to fight a case at the WTO level is preventing the developing countries and the least developed countries from performing well at the WTO level because ultimately the interest of these private members is getting affected definitely indirectly there is an effect on the interest of the government as well not that there is not but it's ultimately an indirect indirect effect the direct effect is on the private members and they are not able to protect their own interests at the WTO level another problem which exists here is with respect to power constraints now when I talk about power constraints I essentially mean that even though the WTO dispute settlement mechanism aims to come up with proper rule based dispute settlement mechanism towards the end it to a certain extent puts the entire burden on the countries itself for example the first stage of a dispute settlement mechanism is consultation this is essentially in the form of a negotiation wherein the countries put forth their points and they try to reach a conclusion the second stage let's say the consultation is not successful then the case will go before a panel the panel has original jurisdiction which is going to decide the case in the first instance the WTO dispute settlement understanding which is the instrument under the WTO which deals with dispute settlement clearly lays down the rules which shall be applicable for the panel to decide the case so there's no problem here we are not relying upon the political capacity of the country to win the case because the rules are clearly defined the next stage let's say the panel is also not able to successfully arrive at a mutually agreeable solution the next stage is appellate body wherein the losing party can approach the appellate body to solve the case once again the WTO dispute settlement mechanism lays down clear rules of interpretation of laws of decision making for the appellate body to conclude the case which is once again fine but after this is where the problem arises which is the problem of implementation let's say the appellate body has given a decision in favor of a country and let's say the losing party is not following the decision of the appellate body or the panel whichever is the final decision the ultimate burden of implementation falls upon the respective country who has won the case because the WTO dispute settlement understanding says that if the winning party is not satisfied with the performance of the losing party with respect to the judgment or the the decision of the appellate body they can initiate retaliatory measures which means ultimately the country who is winning has to take the decision or has to take the action in order to force the losing party to agree to the appellate body judgment so if we compare it with the domestic level at the domestic level if the judgment of a particular court is not followed there are civil and criminal repercussions to it which is dealt with by the government itself by the court itself not by individual parties but at the WTO level the DSB or the dispute settlement body raises its hands and says now the country who has won has the freedom to take retaliatory measures now this is where the problem arises and I would like to make a last point with an example supporting this point in the case of US gambling US gambling is a famous case relating to goods and sorry general agreement and trade and services it basically was a complaint which was filed against USA's policy where USA had banned gambling services and the complainant was a small country called Antigone Barbada Antigone Barbada is a small country in the Caribbean it's one of the Caribbean islands now Antigone Barbada won the case at the panel level they won it the decision was against the USA this decision was challenged by the USA before the appellate body and before the appellate body as well Antigone Barbada were the winning parties they had won the case there as well however after this stage USA who was the losing party refused to implement the decision of the appellate body Antigone Barbada which is a small country had won the case fair and square they were the ones who were supposed to make USA follow their own demands but USA refused to do it and the only option left with Antigone Barbada was to take retaliatory measures now the problem is retaliatory measures cannot be taken with military might at the WTO level it has to be taken from trade perspective itself so either you stop your exports to the other country or you stop the other country's imports to your country that is the only extent of retaliation that can take place but Antigone Barbada were having a very low trade trading relation with USA because they were a small country they weren't expecting a lot they weren't exporting a lot of products they were not importing a lot of products so even if they stopped the export and import with USA even if they declare a trade embargo against USA USA is not getting affected at all because USA is not dependent upon Antigone Barbada for their imports or exports they have many other trading companions with whom they can conduct profitable trade and this is where the problem arises with respect to the dispute settlement mechanism that the developing and the least developed countries are at a disadvantage here because they do not have the necessary power to go against a developed country even if they have won the case fair and square a similar situation arose in the EC Bananas 3 case as well where in Ecuador won the case and Ecuador was not able to take successful retaliatory measures so as to arm twist EC into following the decision of the appellate body so even after conducting the entire process spending 500,000 US dollars in the end at the time of retaliation the developing and the least developed countries still face a problem and this is the institutional problem which exists at the WTO dispute settlement mechanism level and with this I would like to conclude my talk on this sir would you like to say anything thank you Shrani it was a wonderful presentation all the issues I brought in and all the issues especially of the recent past between 2000 to 2020 and even 21 that is relating to the COVID issue and how the companies are being represented by a state and how the state finances them and what exactly is the difficulty the people are going to face now once again thank you very much and if anybody has any doubts as because it's not here he has just told me to conduct the proceedings please if you have questions please let us know so there's one question in the chat box can I address yeah so the question basically says if India grants a compulsory licensing to produce AstraZeneca Covishield vaccine can America or the company oppose this and the follow-up question is what happens after then so the answer to the first question is yes it can be opposed because a similar situation has arisen in Russia as well in Russia Remdesivir which is one of the major drugs used for curing COVID was granted compulsory licensing for a Russian manufacturing company but the original company which was Gilead which is a pharmaceutical company housed in the US they have currently filed a case against the Russian pharmaceutical company for violating intellectual property even though they have obtained a compulsory licensing so in the same situation even if India grants a compulsory license it can definitely be opposed to by the company or America as well to the second question as to what happens after that it depends upon the domestic countries courts so right now if you look at the Russian example the case is filed by Gilead against the Russian pharmaceutical company in Russia itself so in that circumstance the Russian court will analyze their own domestic compulsory licensing regime and they will decide whether the compulsory license was granted on a legitimate basis or not alternatively it can also be challenged at the WTO dispute settlement mechanism level now that is where the confusion arises in the sense that the WTO dispute settlement mechanism will not look into domestic legislation they will look into TRIPS agreement and TRIPS agreement as I mentioned has mentioned 12 specific conditions which are to be followed before the compulsory license is granted so WTO dispute settlement mechanism will check the validity of the compulsory license based on whether the 12 conditions are fulfilled or not so anything you would like to add oh it's fine this to the point because the equipment disturbed the entire structure of it anyone any any any comments anyone so there's one more question it was it was put a little earlier it basically asks whether the globalization policy by Indian government in the form of a special economic zone and foreign direct investment whether that was adopted on behest of the WTO no I don't think so oh see the one important factor which you should remember is the world trade statistics are maintained by the ministry of trade and commerce and they know that if you intend to earn more foreign exchange the only it is trade nothing beyond only through trade will be in a position to earn good foreign exchange and the discussion in the cabinet is only how to improve this matter and this can be done by creating special economic zones by leasing the property or giving the property for a number of years and inviting them to have their own ventures inside and later production and immediately explored they can earn because at that time our balance of payments was not that good and today foreign exchange comparatively with all criticism said and done it has gone about 690 billion dollars and for a country like India it is remember not a small amount you see because our per capita income if you compare to doses as well as now it has gone up tremendously so by taking this consideration I don't think that that is the answer that maybe an allied answer here and then anyone correct sir even I agree with you I also think that under WTO investment doesn't fall under WTO so investment is the exceed agreement which is a separate thing altogether so I agree with it so there's one more question with all these restrictions how can Indian companies manufacture our own vaccines should I take it sir yeah yeah take it so with these restrictions now the only option is to come up with a different process and a product itself so currently whatever is happening right because India has developed its own vaccine that is co-vaccine so it's a different process it's a different product which is why it is not infringing upon any other any other companies intellectual property however one point that I would like to state here is Indian government is itself a little hesitant to grant a compulsory license for co-vaccine so there's a little bit of a contradiction there in the sense that the government is demanding a waiver at the international level but at the domestic level they are not granting a compulsory license for their own vaccine however the the argument of the government is that we will face foreign repercussions if we allow for compulsory license so that is something that we can do but if they come up with a separate product and a process for manufacturing the vaccines or the drugs then it's absolutely legitimate the problem arises when they copy a particular process or a product yes one more question is there should I take it yeah come on it says even now the underdeveloped countries have not been able to get vaccines and what role can the WHO play so would you like to take this World Health Organization no the WHO remember during the course of the before especially the COVID as well as after the COVID it was taking sites and when it was taking sites it was criticized and it was criticized you might be knowing even the same Secretary General is being criticized and they said this is not expected of the WHO and Arab courts even the United States especially under the former president he said we are going to withdraw and he said we are not going to give any contribution if this is the order of the day but then point is whether it is China or it is United States ultimately each state is bothered about its growth and on paper remember hard reality no it is just like in a family wearing one or two everyone takes care of himself and his family and at the international level also this is what is happening and they say we have allocated resources and you give claim the amount from some other organizations which is meant for this purpose now one important point which you shouldn't remember which I did not point out both of us did not point out a WHO is a good organization for the simple reason under the dispute settlement mechanism it can take a decision against anybody against the United States maybe United Kingdom all the permanent members which is possible provided it hits the clause or the section whereas you might be knowing the other organizations take international monetary fund as well as international bank for the reconstruction and development where indeed the role is Ulta the developing countries remember we'll have to listen to the IMF as well as AIBRD least developed countries as well as the developing countries and if you don't listen remember they will put you in such a position and the position most of the time is awkward and unflinting that cannot happen under the WTO this is the advantage absolutely true sir in fact just support that with respect to World Bank and IMF whenever they grant loans to the developing countries the loans are followed with a lot of clauses and the clauses have so many things such as one of the clauses I remember was that the developing country to whom the loan is given should have an effective labour policy labour is nowhere related to obtaining a loan at the international level but because it was done at the behest of the developed countries they wanted the labour of legislation in the developing country which is why they demanded it so absolutely correct sir even the same thing is happening in the WHO as well very most of the things are being governed by the developed countries before I wind up I wanted to bring one issue in 2000 what had happened was there was a movement and this movement which has taken place throughout the world and the movement began with a few NGOs and the title of this movement is take out the intellectual what we call as intellectual property rights or issues related to intellectual property rights from the WTO and put it in the WIPO now when the movement began many thought it may not get the required support but then remember in one year 1000 NGOs supported and signed and when 1000 NGOs supported it remember and actually there was a great scholar especially in the world trade law he happened to be an Indian Jagdish Bhagavati is a professor on trade law at the University of Columbia he supported and he wrote an article and the name of the article is shrink or sink now he said every when you buy a western product especially medicines manufactured by a multinational corporation you pay the money and this money which you pay is by your tax and the tax which you pay remember naturally goes into the coffers to the western countries and doesn't come back and doesn't come back and that is how you entered them and you become poorer this is in support last point so once again we all best wishes to all of you thank you thank you Shani thank you so much sir