*{ September 2001 International Trade 
N°2, Vol I 
} 

 *partie=titre  WTO Shrink or Sink  *partie=nil 

« It's time to stop corporate globalization and to fight for another world we know is possible. In November 1999, the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Third Ministerial Meeting in Seattle collapsed in spectacular fashion, in the face of unprecedented protest from people and governments around the world. Since then around the world in rich and poor nations alike, millions of people have joined the fight for a just and sustainable future and against corporate globalization. Despite the promises to improve the system made at the end of the Seattle ministerial aimed at countering the WTO's crisis of legitimacy, no improvements have taken place and instead things have gotten worse. The time is overdue to roll back the power and authority of the WTO.  » Mobilizations in cities around the world will occur November 9th and 10th as the WTO will start is new Ministerial Meeting in Doha (Qatar). September 29 and 30 in solidarity with US mobilizations around IMF and WB issues, a European action will happen in Geneva around the WTO, the third piece of Corporate Globalization, asking for « Global Jusice », gathering few thousands of European activists. Learning, knowing and acting where you are but with thousands of other people around the world, that is the program of our globalization for a better world. 

A citizens' movement linking citizens, associations, trade unions and newspapers founded ATTAC in France on June 3rd, 1998. The idea for this initiative came from an editorial written by Ignacio Ramonet: "Disarm the markets", published in "Le Monde diplomatique" in December 1997: 
"The Tobin Tax, named after the American Nobel prize winner for economics who proposed it in 1972, [would allow] for the modest taxation of all transactions on the foreign exchange markets in order to stabilise them, and at the same time, raise funds for the international community. 
At a rate of 0.1%, the Tobin Tax would generate an annual sum of about 166 billion dollars, twice the amount needed per year to eradicate extreme  poverty between now and the beginning of the century." 
ATTAC's first unique trait is to have from the outset gathered its first four constituent parts from the citizens' movements, organizations of "Popular Education", unions and from the press. All these constituents gathered around a common objective, to which they could all relate, to re-appropriate "corporatized public space" and give it back to the people. 

ATTAC's second unique trait is to have built a structure in France that has both "top-down" leadership at the national level and a militant base that makes ATTAC a genuine citizen's movement with autonomous local groups which can both act locally and feed ideas and initiatives back to the top. Consistency is ensured by a well-defined and democratically determined platform.  
It should be remembered that all of this sprang from an initial newspaper editorial. Its author was amazed at the massive volume of readers who responded. 10 months later a first meeting was held in the South of France and today, 2 years later, ATTAC has 25,000 members round the country and 160 local groups carrying out both militant action and educational initiatives to raise public awareness of the issues surrounding globalization. 

At a time when economic thought seemed to be reduced to a single "conventional wisdom", when resistance in terms of trade union influence or alternative economic models seemed to be waning, ATTAC immediately aroused popular enthusiasm by refusing to accept the status quo and the received wisdom from so-called experts, i.e. from an arrogant elite who dominate the debate, ignore democracy and seek to impose financial totalitarianism in the form of economic dictatorship of market forces. 

Starting with an initial proposal, the Tobin Tax (Currency Transaction Tax), ATTAC has been carried forward by an enormous wave of support during the last two years from a wide range of public actors and, in particular, citizens who want to better understand, to act, to reverse the predominant economic thinking, and to refuse the dictatorship of the financial markets. 

To fight against the domination of the financial markets in a world where everything is progressively becoming "merchandise", where everything is bought or sold, in reality means refusing the way economic, human, social, and political relations are organized. It means to finally put oneself on an equal political footing with the will to change the world by mobilizing citizens. 

As result of ATTAC's development, its increasing significance, increasing memberships and contributions, the association had to become politically active; that is maintain, at different levels, relations with political figures, whether or not they are institutionalized, i.e. official political parties. This situation has raised a number of questions. One is critical: the association's independence and its refusal to be a part of any official political institution. 

Today, ATTAC benefits from the broad support of its many members who bring both well-developed and diverse experience, but also many who are new to grassroots movements. This diversity is viewed as a major strength, which brings the association closer to achieving its main objective: regain the space lost by democracy to the benefit of financial markets. 

ATTAC's campaign against the dictatorship of the markets requires building a new international financial architecture based on several proposals as foundations of democracy:  
1) a global currency transaction tax,  
2) the removal of tax havens  
3) canceling the debt of developing countries. 
This would help citizens to regain space for action and their freedom of choice at the national and international level. 

Members of ATTAC include elected officials from various governmental  structures, notably the French and European Parliaments as well as local governments. The parliamentarians play a specific role due to their electorate mandates. They are invited to work in specialized networks to develop our proposals and to collaborate with ATTAC headquarters as well as the local chapters in France. At the same time local governments and especially cities have the opportunity to define corporate globalization in relation with human localization and hence play a key role in understanding the processes with regard to the solutions. In this respect the "Morsang Appeal" (text signed by local government officials following out a first seminar held for them in Morsang sur Orge) is an important reference point for activities organized jointly by elected officials and local chapters. 

However ATTAC is not a political party nor does it intend to become one, the association presents no candidates for elections, is not bound by electoral goals and its calendar of events and policies are established independently. No member of ATTAC running for election is authorized to represent the association in his or her campaign. 
ATTAC's objectives cross paths with many other organizations whether they are NGOs, grassroots movements, unions  or political parties. In this respect ATTAC plays a major role as a catalyst for democracy. 

 *partie=titre Education, Health and Culture in the Firing Line  *partie=nil 
 *partie=titre 1.    Sectors where there is a strong historical tradition of public intervention.   *partie=nil 

Certain service sectors, such as advertising  or tourism, have long been open to competition, or, as in the case of legal, accounting and financial services, have seen their provision assured by the private sector within a nationally regulated framework.  

Education and health, on the other hand, are  sectors where public intervention  ­ or the operation of noncommercial structures which derive from civil society  ­ has been very strong historically speaking. Similarly, because of the stakes involved, culture is also a field where public intervention, and also initiatives from society, have always been very important.  

The reason why public authorities or actions initiated by associations have been so influential lies in the fact that the market cannot provide an adequate response to social needs in these areas. In a democratic society, free and open access to healthcare, to education or to culture, should be guaranteed rights for all people; each person's dignity as a citizen and as a human being is conditional upon this.  
There are other matters of public interest to be added to these social or societal concerns. As economists explain, education and health are areas where external influences are strong. This is why everyone considers that ensuring of a basic level of schooling for all people, including those who have neither the means nor the desire to learn, is one of the priorities of public action. Because the education of each individual benefits everybody. Because treating the sick avoids the spread of epidemics.  
Finally, there are specific stakes at a national level: building a common culture, defence and the assertion of a cultural heritage.  

The importance of public investment in education has been a response to an economic necessity (the community taking responsibility for vocational training which companies have refused to finance, unless its aim was to facilitate the adaptation of employees), a political plan for social integration (educating citizens who are free of outdated beliefs and bound by a common cultural core) and a response to social demands (family demands).  

In the area of health, public intervention (or systems of social insurance) has developed alongside the general development of social protection, where the community has once again provided for the integration of employees, by reducing social insecurity. Protection against illness (and first of all against any resulting loss in income) goes together with the growth and improvement of the retirement system.  
Finally, in the area of culture, the matters at stake are very diverse. The field of " culture " is vast. A large part of popular culture is in the marketplace, is often heavily taxed (high VAT on CDs), other areas, in the name of culture with a capital  `C', are heavily subsidized (lyrique). In the field of audiovisual services, public intervention ­ sometimes associated with a monopoly ­ has partly responded to a wish to control information, in parallel with a concern with popular education (compare the BBC and the Peyrefittee models in the 1960s... ). But public intervention may also be justified by motives concerning the assertion of national culture : hence the cultural exception defended by France.  

*{By Philippe Frémeaux 
Chief Editor. Alternatives Economiques 
Translation:  Philip Deer. Jean François Druhen Charnaux, coorditrad@attac.org  
A Contribution to the Study Day for Attac activists on the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). 12th May 2001  
Original document with footnotes and sources: http://attac.org/fra/list/doc/fremeauxen.htm }

  
 *partie=titre 2.    The WTO's intention : to apply its logic to every sector where there is trading activity.   *partie=nil 

Like all services, education, health and culture are on the agenda at the GATS negotiations[1].  
What is true for all services is equally applicable to these three areas. Services have a growing impact on GDP. In parallel with public or non-commercial intervention, they are the object of a growing number of trading activities (from fee-paying education to over-the-counter medicine [2]), whether these result from the privatisation of public resources or from the earlier or more recent development of private activities outside public means. These private activities are often bound by a national regulatory framework, which consists of a certain number of specific rules.   

In reality, this does not prevent these areas from becoming the object of increasing internationalisation, either in the form of international commercial transactions, as goods or services, or in the form of IDEs, foreign producers who offer their services in different countries. According to its logic, which consists of seeking to regulate everything which may be classed as international trade and, keeping in line with member states' wishes, the WTO is taking an interest in these sectors. These " good reasons " lead us back to the strategic aims of the " major players " in the area, whether from the USA or Europe, to organize the freeing-up or opening of those markets which may ensure their domination across the world.  

This is particularly true of US companies with the agreement of their government. The United States have a high export-trade deficit, but they command a strong position in a certain number of related service and goods sectors : education, industry, pharmaceuticals, audiovisual services. In all these areas, their companies (or certain structures, such as major universities or certain HMOs, which are non-profitable in themselves but which benefit from massive budgets), dominate world supply, beyond the ownership of capital. In this way, they play a key role in defending the opening-up of markets, but also in defending intellectual property rights (as is illustrated by the texts of the Coalition of Services Industry).  

As a general rule, the EU defends similar positions, given its own interests and the influence of a certain number of European companies (even if it  plays a more significant role in other services, such as local sevices, Vivendi and co oblige). It can, however, have specific interests, such as France's cultural exception. It is also more open to the interests of developing countries in the area of property rights for medicines. It is true to say that it has not been in the front line over recent matters.  

The field of applicaton of the GATS concerns four modes of service delivery : cross-border supplies (e.g. the purchase of educational software on the internet), consumption on foreign soil (studies carried out abroad), commercial presence abroad (foreign production and diffusions (broadcast) companies), physical presence (foreign citizens working freely in medicine or teaching). The GATS ultimately defines certain international investment laws (in which its effects are not dissimilar to the AMI project).  

Services, because they are mainly produced locally today, in the place where they are rendered, effectively do not so much follow an export logic as one of on-the-spot investment. Here the matter for debate is therefore not so much the suppression of customs rights over goods at the point of entry as  the application of a principal of generalised `national treatment' : when a government allows a private agent to operate in a certain area on its territory, it cannot refuse, according to this principal, to apply the same treatment to all foreign agents who satisfy the same obligations. Reasoning in terms of `national treatment' no longer applies, in these conditions, to the product or to the service as such, but rather to its whole production chain : the status of the provider, production, distribution, etc...    

In this spirit, the US is seeking to integrate within the concrete contents of the agreements the logic they impose in the bilateral agreements on investment : the notion of national treatment is applied not only to those companies already established in the country, but also to all those which are likely to wish to do so. Thus it is not only a matter of ensuring a level playing field for those who are already present in a market, but to set up an open door for all new participants (with national treatment extended to before the setting-up stage. On the other hand, the European propositions respect the right of states to authorise the IDEs.  

 *partie=titre 2.1.  Education : what are the stakes ?   *partie=nil 

What is at stake in education is more important today than ever. People are using terms such as " intelligence civilisation ", " life-long learning " and the acceleration of technical change. New conditions of employment, and notably the growing flexibility of workforce relations  ­ to which people are widely subjected but which are also welcomed to a certain extent ­ rest on a belief that everyone is constantly nurturing their " human capital " and their qualifications (hence all that the recognition of acquired learning implies). The importance of education is increased further by the fact that a large majority of jobs now require a mastery of formal skills for which specific training is given.  

This is why a continuing rise in global education expenditure may be observed on the part of public authorities, but also on the part of companies and individuals. Paradoxically, the growing importance of education has resulted in the increasing presence of the private sector. On the demand side, the continual heightening of the strategic character of education means that the wealthiest companies and individuals are prepared to pay in order to " buy " education or training. On the supply side, the private sector can see a potentially huge market opening up, given that the number of world students has risen from 6.5 million en 1950 to 51 million in 1980 and probably to more than 90 million today. The following explanation is given by Glenn Jones, founder of a multimedia educational empire (Knowledge TV, Jones international university, Global alliance for transnational education... ) : " Education is the largest market in the world, the one with the fastest growth rate and  one where the current contributors are not responding to demand ". The effects of economic globalisation may be added to this. In the areas of technological training and management this causes a growing internationalisation of job offers for executives and middle managers and engineers. As Bernard Ramanantsoa, directeur général d'HEC[3], recently explained, " Recruitment has become 
globalised. Today, multinational companies seek employees who have experience of different cultures. Students are adapting and seeking as international a form of training as possible ". Hence growing mobility in the student population : today the United States receives 500,000 foreign students, Germany 180,000, the United Kingdom and France each receive about 130,000. According to the outline document available on the WTO website set up in 1998, trading across the world in higher education services had already reached the equivalent of 190 billion francs in 1995. And the contribution of this area to turnover from services in the United States was in the region of 50 billion francs in 1996, which makes it the fifth largest exporting sector in the country.  

It is true that the major US universities command resources which bear little relation to those of the rest of the world. And many US companies are also in the process of developing educational products through the possibilities offered by the Internet. In this case again, what has been tested and proves able to cover itself financially on the internal market of the US can be used as a base for attacking other markets.  
The WTO follows the trend as much as it causes it. It wishes to eliminate the obstacles to the free provision of services : non-recognition of degrees,  prevention of the free circulation of students and teachers, restrictions on the entry of foreign investors into national education systems. In a certain way, it encourages the adoption of rules which the European countries are today in the process of establishing between themselves in the context of the single market.  

Today, the threat remains essentially confined to certain higher education and continuing vocational education sectors, areas where education and training are often already fee-paying, and where the private sector (or the consulate-linked sector, via the chambers of commerce) play a relatively important role. These sectors are already on the way to internationalisation, either by the creation of subsidiaries, or through partnership agreements between universities and/or business schools or training organisations.  
On the other hand, as regards primary and secondary education, the threat does not seem so strong. States do not appear to be prepared to abandon their prerogatives in this area. Moreover, these activities are far from profitable, except for a niche market, intended for the wealthiest families. Where the private sector's share is increasing, it is in accordance with political choices which favour recourse to public services where management has been delegated, on financial bases which remain public (contracted or non-contracted private confessional schooling in France).  

This being said, the experience of chartered schools in the US opens the way for the emergence of " private multinational groups dealing in education as a public service " in much the same way as the situation which exists in areas such as water. Chartered schools (public schools with charters) are local secondary schools entrusted to private companies which are financed by the State and accessible to all. It is thought that, in ten years, close to 10 % of state schools could be managed in this way, which represents a market of 30 billion dollars currently funded by the public purse. But, for the moment, these activities remain low on profit. Similar experiments have commenced or are due to commence, notably in Canada, Switzerland, in Holland and Denmark.  

Nevertheless, the diversity of national cultures remains an extremely resilient protectionist barrier and the appearance of " multinationals " in these areas seems unlikely in the near future.  
On the other hand, the development via the Internet of offers of complete educational packages, or of educational assistance services (help with homework, etc... ) has immediately targeted a world market, as illustrated by the World Education Exhibition which took place in Vancouver in May 2000.  This market is largely concerned with management and technological programmes, which can be run in English and the content of which is already globally oriented for the most part or fits American models. Thousands of these on-line programmes are available. European universities lag far behind in this field, even though they have now joined the race.  

There are several things at stake in this : the appearance of a worldwide educational supply brings about the marginalisation of national public systems of education and brings pressure in favour of the definition of qualifications on an international basis (as in the case of the MBA, or as is shown by the recent reform of Sciences-Po in Paris).  

However, if the Internet is the channel for a globalised educational supply, what is at stake is less a matter of virtual educational programmes against the university as we traditionally know it than the way in which the two supply forms operate. The Internet allows distance courses and interactive modules between students and tutors, cutting out distance. Nevertheless, a high-quality educational programme implies direct exchanges, for any pedagogical procedure not only involves knowledge transmission but also learning how to become socialised. Hence the thinking behind the likely agreements between educational establishments, through the creation of subsidiaries, adaptation at a national level etc...   combining reality and virtual reality. One risk is obviously that the most powerful groups and individuals involved will be those who profit most from these agreements.  

Finally, contrary to what is professed by American educational companies and the grands groupes des TIC, there is a risk that the Internet will rather contribute to the worsening of inequality between North and South. Indeed, the positive effects of the Internet ­ cutting out distance, reduced information transmission costs ­ cannot benefit those countries which do not have basic infrastructures and where a large proportion of the population cannot access the basic training necessary for taking advantage of computer technology. It should be pointed out that the Trade and Development Committee of the WTO recently stated the need to develop the South's infrastructures, but gave no indication of how this was to be financed...   There is a risk that the development of education and training via the Net will reinforce the marginalisation of the less developed countries.  

Hence the importance of putting a limit on the logic of the market and of beginning by reaffirming the view of education as public property, and consequently the need for a public source of supply which can respond to the social demand. This is no easy matter given the level of influence already attained by the commercial sector. Moreover, the aim is not to " prohibit " its development but to defend a sufficient level of financing for the public system so that  it can guarantee a free quality service for the whole of the population.    

 *partie=titre 2.2. Health   *partie=nil 

In the area of health, public intervention operates at two levels : in finance mechanisms (through insurance or taxation), which means free service can be offered or those on the demand side may have enough money to pay for their requirements (total or partial reimbursement for medical expenses), and in the supply of care itself (public hospitals). Everywhere in Europe, the finance mechanisms are public (or managed by the `social partners'), while the offer in healthcare calls considerably upon the private sector (healthcare in towns assured by private practicioners, private clinics which are private or managed by associations).  

In the United States, healthcare for the poorest people and the aged is paid for out of the public purse (which represents 45 % of total expenditure on health), while for fully integrated salaried workers it is paid for by private insurance companies (which negotiate a global reimbursement of expenses with care-providers. 43 % of the population is either deprived of medical cover or is badly covered and this especially concerns all the poor workers, who cannot gain access to medical insurance through their employment.   Private companies, alongsidemany non-profit organizations, play an essential role, both as insurers (and brokers-buyers of healthcare in the context of HMOs[4]), but also as healthcare dispensers. A large number of doctors are salaried or their work is closely monitored by healthcare networks.   

Finally, a considerable proportion of expenditure on health is linked to medicine right across countries in the North. This is a sector where the only participants are private ones, even though it profits to a large extent from discoveries made by public research. The pharmaceutical industry is one sector which is experiencing both vigorous growth and amazing profitability. Companies' net profits represent 18,3 % of their turnover. This industry is effectively free to fix its prices in its main market (the United States), it suffers little from competition (because of patent laws) and its customers, in the main, are only indirectly liable for the prices they pay, while their priority, their own health, puts them in a position of total dependence. Health, therefore, is a service activity, but also a commercial one, for which the question of commercial property rights is a major one.   

If the buoyant markets are essentially in the North (five countries ­ the USA, France, Italy, Germany and the United Kingdom represent 90 % of the world market for tritherapies while 90 % of AIDS sufferers live in developing countries), the major laboratories fight tooth and nail to defend their intellectual property rights at a world level. In this way they can defend high prices and an economic model which is both very expensive for communities in rich countries and particularly scandalous to the extent that it closes off access to treatment in poor countries (and creates conditions for contrefaçons which can be very dangerous). Payments on R&D expenditure is a poor pretext. In actual fact, the price of medicines, besides contributing towards huge profits, finances exorbitant marketing expenses  ­ three times higher than R&D for the major US laboratories. Clearly the price of medicines has little to do with their real costs, even if the paying back of research expenses is included !  

In all the OCDE countries, the different governments are looking at the best way of controlling health expenditure. The temptation to increase the proportion of expenditure paid for by the final consumer, which has been very strong in the most recent decades, has lost momentum for reasons which are social and which are related to public health and the interests of the medical and pharmaceutical lobbies which are abundantly clear. Health is considered to be a public asset, which implies that each individual should have their healthcare paid for.  

In practice, the search for a reduction of costs comes down to a choice between reinforcing the administrative control over healthcare activities (PMSI à l'hôpital, control of healthcare in towns) and setting up competitive mechanisms between insurers and dispensers of healthcare. This second scenario, for which the big insurance companies are pressing, has an ever increasingly free-market influence which risks reinforcing inequalities in access to healthcare in line with the model observed in the United States, even though this model has resulted in resounding failure.  

The existence already of private operators at most levels of the sector ­ mutual companies and complementary insurance in France, private clinics, private laboratories, etc...   - creates the conditions for other operators to penetrate the market. This is already happening in France in the area of complementary health insurance or the private structures for hospitalisation which are owned by foreign capital (as is planned in the European directives adopted by France). The risk is that such an evolution will encourage those who argue in favour of a division of risks (a process which has already begun for complementary insurance and which has brought on tricky negotiations with Brussels over the mutual companies directive. This may open the way for a less egalitarian health system.  

In addition there is the whole implication of the development of e-commerce. The Internet is an influential factor in the improvement of the way in which health systems function (diagnoses via computer, data exchange between specialists,... ). It also opens the door to on-line sales of medicine and the appearance of on-line healthcare sites which may ask users to pay (or which may be financed by the laboratories through advertising).  

In this matter, the same stakes between North and South are to be found as in educational matters. But, with regard to the South, the main thing at stake today surrounds commercial property rights (the right of poor countries to produce generic medicines) as the recent trial against South Africa illustrated. In this context, the 1994 TRIPSADPIC agreements signed in Marrakech make provisions for the obligation for all signatory countries to adopt legislation to protect intellectual property (patents in this case) before 2006  at the latest. Everything depends on the interpretation in the text of the agreement which foresees that " in the event of a critical national situation or other cirumstances of extreme urgency " governments will be able to authorize local companies to produce certain treatments in defiance of the patents which protect them. These are the dispositions that the South African government wished to translate into its own national law. What was in the balance at the trial for the major pharmaceutical companies was the greatest possible limitation of the possibility of bending the law concerning intellectual property rights[5].  

 *partie=titre 2.3. Culture.   *partie=nil 

Culture has become an important economic field, with the development of leisure   activities, and the massive spread of computer technology allowing diffusion of pictures and sound in different forms. Vinyl records and 1960s television have given way to a whole range of means of diffusion and reception, of supports and of very broad subject matter, now brought together by digitalization.  
But the most important aspect of this subject is the time spent on it : television is by far the most popular leisure activity. We may regret this and think that there are other ways of occupying one's time, but the facts are there and, as television is also the main advertising medium, what is at stake in the audiovisual programmes industry whether the programmes fall into the fiction or light entertainment category. The concerns linked to the cinema, to music or to video games are also essential. 

This is also the area where conflicts are the fiercest today. This is because of the American domination on the world audiovisual programme market and because of the resistance put up by certain countries, beginning with France, in the face of this domination. According to the terms of the GATS, the free-market rules concerning international exchanges are  applicable to cinema and television, though with some small modifications. States retain the right to have their own policy in the audiovisual field. They can refuse to include audiovisual services in the list of GATS obligations (hence the nuance between exclusion ­ which would mean that the audiovisual industry is excluded from negotiations  ­ and cultural exception  ­ which allows a country to abstain from making any propositions and so remain outside the area of negotiations). This allows a country not to apply the principle of `national treatment' and to exclude certain measures of policy in audiovisual affairs from the principle of the most favoured nation. However, these last areas of control are temporary ones and are to be reviewed in 2005. The European states and Canada have profited from this postponement of the application of the principles of the WTO.  

An enormous amount is at stake in this in terms of the defence of diversity in the world's cultures. But this notion of diversity can only have real influence if each country is able to support its national supply side in the area of film and television production by protectionist  measures or subsidies. And by defending the existence of a public service in audiovisual matters.  

These are probably the areas where most is at stake in connection with NTIC and the Internet (MP3, satellite television or television on the Internet, the direct showing of films in digital format by satellite in mutiplex cinemas), services not covered by the `Télévision sans Frontières' directive. In the current absence of e-business and other means of transmitting digital data, there is a major risk of deviation from the aims defended by the cultural exception.  

France's stated objectives are currently to maintain the settlements she achieved in the 1993 GATS (the possibility of being excluded from the area of the agreements en faisant une absence d'offre which enables her not to respect the principle of `national treatment' and so to subsidise French producers). However, France would not like to see her objectives challenged by the negotiations which are taking place in other service sectors :  
-        France defends a more free-market oriented regulation of the major retailing sector, given the power of those involved at the national level in this area. But the USA considers  that the area of distribution also includes the distribution of audiovisual programmes. This is, of course, an area where the control of the distribution side plays a strategic role and where accepting the freeing-up of distribution would risk putting national output at risk.  
-        France and the EU defend the principle of technological neutrality. How a service is brought to people in no way modifies the nature of the service. The aim of ebusiness negotiations is not to bring audiovisual programmes broadcast on the Net into the field of negotiation. It is rather to challenge the classification of these as virtual goods, which is defended by the USA, which aims to bring them into the field of the GATT, which is more restrictive.  
-        The audiovisual sector must also be excluded from the subsidy negotiations (5% limit for services à l'instar as for what is applicable for goods) and from negotiations over investments.  
One of the most important goals in this area today is probably to try to get France out of its relative isolation in its defence of the cultural exception, itself linked to an attitude which is sometimes seen as more protectionist towards its economic interest or its own cultural influence than truly concerned about defending diversity. The power of the citizens' movement, on both a national and international basis, can play an important role, especially because the emergence of `French' players of international size or stature, may prove to be capable of revising the determination of public decision-makers and may equally contribute towards fonder alliances at the international level...    
Encadré : unregulated e-commerce  

The framework of the WTO imposes no regulation of ecommerce as such. les questions qui lui sont liées relevant soit de prestations de services d'accès à internet Related matters which may be classed as either access services to the Internet, (regulated by agreements in the telecom field) the supply of computer services (regulated by the GATS or the TRIPS-ADPIC agreements), or the use of the Internet as  a distribution channel for other goods (regulated by the GATT). 

If the sale of goods, because of the physical delivery process, remains theoretically subject to national customs rules and health regulations (even though the example of on-line sites which sell pharmaceutical or performanceenhancing products shows that border control is like a sieve), the same is not true for virtual services provided by information technology. And here may be found a substantial proportion of cultural goods, which today are associated with physical supports such as books, newspapers, CDs, cassettes, etc., can now be transmitted via the Internet, in an entirely virtual fashion, which enables some to get round the rules which have been fixed in the name of the cultural exception. 

The World Trade Organisation (WTO) is the primary rulemaking regime of the globalisation process. Its explicit aim is to allow as much freedom as possible to trade. After only five years from its inception, it has become one of the most powerful and secretive international bodies on earth and World Bank and World Health Organisation officials are acknowledging that it is probably the most influential international agency with respect to health. 

The international trade agreements which take place within the WTO are intended to set rules and entitlements for trade practices at the global level and may have direct or indirect implications to health and social policies which may not be given sufficient attention in the present context of decision-making. A large part of these implications derive from what the content of these agreements implies to poverty, income distribution and food security in the global scene. On the other side, the rights and duties spelt out in the agreement may in practice interfere with the contents and scope of health and social policies across countries. The actual impact of international trade agreements is only gradually emerging and in many cases through the settlement of trade-related disputes between countries or through debates concerning interpretations of stipulations made. 
General issues 

The implicit presumption on which the WTO is based is that social and health policies are simply assumed to benefit from economic growth. What is not taken into account, however, is whether trade-policies may end up substantially influencing how countries implement health and so cial policies. 

The basic issues regarding the WTO implications to health and health policies are related to the very principles that constitute the agreement. In particular: 
· The WTO agreement requires that products must be compared to "like" products without considering production methods and practices, even in case when these may jeopardise public health or labour rights. For example, products containing hormones, GMOs or antibiotics, or other goods made through compromising labour rights or safety are to be considered "like" products with those produced without so doing. · In the process of settling disputes between members regarding public health and safety concerns, "the least trade restrictive measures" must be used. This means that the most market oriented approaches and mechanisms are to be preferred, such as voluntary rather than compulsory measures, labelling rather than more systematic regulatory interventions such as taxation or banning of access, advertising or use. In this way the final decision is often in favour of individualised measures thus shifting the financial (or other) risk from corporations to public sector and individuals. · The Article XX of GATT states that governments may adopt or enforce measures "necessary to protect human, animal or plant life or health." However, what is a necessary public health measure is not clarified. As the dispute settlement process is closed and based on the deliberation of a non specialised, non health-oriented body,  the competing trade interests which are at stake within the dispute may well overturn important health considerations. · The Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) which conducts the settlement process is made up of 3 to 5 people with trade administration and trade law expertise. 

The WTO has clear influence on the nature of governance, risk sharing, wealth distribution and basic values, with obvious implications to health and well being. WTO explicitly threatens to shift the health risks from corporations to individual consumers and to dismantle precautionary measures in health and safety regulation. 
 
*{ By Angelo Stefanini 
Department of Public Health University of Bologna 
 
Original document ATTAC Newsletter 90: http://attac.org/listen.htm  

}

 *partie=titre Health vs Trade from any relevant sources may be sought, decisions are not made on the basis of judgement on these.  *partie=nil 

 *partie=titre  IMPLICATIONS OF SPECIFIC AGREEMENTS  *partie=nil 

I. SPS  - Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures 
This agreement deals with issues related to food safety and animal and plant health regulations. It contains two main principles: 1. Members are encouraged to base their measures on international standards, where they exist. The crucial issue in this case is obviously related to who sets the standards. 2. Members are allowed to take safeguarding sanitary measures provided they are based on science, they are necessary to protect human and plant health and do not discriminate between members where similar conditions prevail. This has to deal with issues such as the interpretation of sufficient scientific evidence and the definition of risk assessment. 

The international standards in food matters used in WTO disputes  are those defined by the Codex Alimentarius, a body belonging to FAO/WHO, which is also where the practice of risk assessment is regulated. The main problem with Codex is the fact that the non government members are mainly representatives of private sector interests. This may clearly jeopardise the impartiality of important decisions and have implications to the risk assessment process as it has been shown that scientists' views on risk vary depending on where they are based. For example, studies by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) on carcinogenicity received little consideration in the hormone-beef case. 

The debate concerning precautionary measures and risk assessment are of importance as the way in which risk assessment is defined may have broad implications to levels of risks and concerns which may be considered. In short, risk assessment narrowly interpreted as a technical measure based on quantitative scientific evidence, rather than a selection process of the least damaging option, is a good way to ensure that regulations would remain as loose as possible to the advantage of the private industry. 
Finally, great concerns come from the reversal of the Precautionary Principle which says that "when an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically. In this context the proponent of an activity, rather than the public, should bear the burden of proof". SPS not only does reverse this principle claiming that, before rejecting a product, its harmful effects must be scientifically demonstrated, but puts also the burden of proof to the country implementing the measure. 

 II.   TRIPS Agreement - Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights 
This agreement sets minimum standards of protection for all forms of intellectual property, including patents, copyrights, trademarks and industrial designs and licences. It also defines rights and obligations for governments in terms of how far they can limit these rights for public purposes. TRIPS agreement, which represents a new aspects in the WTO compared with GATT, was basically a victory for United States industries who had lobbied hard for it. The clearest health implications of the TRIPS agreement deal with pharmaceutical policies, patent rights and costs of drugs. The recent cases of Thailand, South Africa and Brazil show how deep into the collective conscience can such disputes go. The interpretation of TRIPS agreement is of importance in issues such as compulsory licensing and parallel imports, which give governments more space in dealing with pharmaceutical policies, but have been reflected as well in the US  - South Africa dispute regarding the interpretation of the agreement. In spite of all their conventional arguments to justify their huge profit margins (i.e. R&D of new drugs), the greed of the pharmaceutical industry has been exposed and new promising developments on the price of drugs are emerging. 

The power of TRIPS is also in its "chilling effect". More and more frequently, proposed national laws are never put into effect, or are weakened, because another nation threatens a WTO challenge to the proposed law or its implementation. Developing countries are especially vulnerable to such threats by more affluent developed nations, which have more resources, both legal and monetary, to take a case to the WTO. A key example is the Gerber vs. Guatemala's infant health law. In this case the TRIPS Agreement was used to stop a law designed to protect infant health in Guatemala. In accord with recommended UNICEF guidelines, Guatemala had banned claims on packaging that equated infant formula with healthy, fat babies. Gerber Products Company, leader seller of baby food, induced the US Department to threaten a WTO challenge in this regulation, arguing that Gerber had an intellectual property right under the WTO TRIPS Agreement. Under threat of challenge, Guatemala government revised its law and now allows labelling that actually violates the UNICEF guidelines. 

Additional concerns related to the TRIPS agreement deal with the issue of patenting of seeds, indigenous products and practices, genetically engineered plants and pharmaceuticals. Vandana Shiva has noted that the transnational corporations that accuse the Third World of piracy and have created TRIPS to stop this piracy, are themselves engaged in large-scale piracy of biological wealth and intellectual heritage from the Third World, including medicinal plants. 

 *partie=titre III.   GATS - General Agreement on Trade in Services  *partie=nil 
 
GATS aims to facilitating the international trade of services setting strict limitations to the process of democratic governance of a country. The agreement was supposed to be launched at Seattle in 1999, but since then talks have begun with the specific intent to overturn almost any legislation governing services from national to local level. Domestic policy-making on service regulation could, in effect, be turned over to the WTO. All legislation would be primarily be aimed at increasing trade. 

The international atmosphere of deregulation and free trade, with the scope that this gives to multinational industries, will also have implications for all sort of public services, health care, education, energy, water and sanitation, for instance. All of these are already coming under the control of the commercial sector as a result of increasing privatisation, structural adjustment and reduction of public spending. A revised GATS could give the commercial sector further access and could make existing privatisations effectively irreversible. Experience in the USA and several Latin American countries, where health services have been run for profit over the past decade or so, suggests that the result will be a decline in accessibility to health care world wide. 

The more health care becomes a domain of market-led private interest, the more easily it will also become a domain of health-related industries such as insurance companies, pharmaceutical companies and firms involved in technologies for treatment and diagnosis. These industries tend to be for profit, which means that they are not likely to collaborate with governments, doctors, researchers or international organizations unless they expect advantages for themselves. These advantages may be mutual. It is likely, however, that attention will be diverted towards policies which will be profitable for these industries while not necessarily being the optimal choices for those receiving the services, or for those paying for the costs, or for health sector development as a whole. In practice this could mean, for example, an emphasis on private insurance within health systems, or the promotion of curative technical fixes rather than preventive measures resulting from public health inter-sectoral policies. 

Most elected officials and civil servants, let alone the general public, are not aware of GATS, nor of its implications. Rules governing international trade are certainly necessary. But such rules should place people before the interests of corporate power. Several countries are demanding that a wide-ranging assessment of the impact of a free market in services be carried out before any more so-called trade barriers are removed. And non government organisations and trade unions are demanding that services in the public interest be clearly exempt from GATS. 

 *partie=titre Conclusions  *partie=nil 
The WTO has clear influence on the nature of governance, risk sharing, wealth distribution and basic values, with obvious implications to health and well being. WTO explicitly threatens to shift the health risks from corporations to individual consumers and to dismantle precautionary measures in health and safety regulation. With regard to the health systems and health care delivery, international agreements are against not only long-term equity considerations, but also technical efficiency arguments concerning health care provision and quality of care. 

It is important that implications of the WTO agreements are assessed in terms of other than trade perspectives and that appropriate analysis and review is required before the agreement is signed. Economic integration and protection of intellectual property rights are not aims in themselves, but should be means towards supporting broader societal aspirations. Furthermore, international trade agreements are not based on natural laws nor represent sacred documents which can only be interpreted by the few devoted and chosen. The alternative is not global trade policies without any rules or embarking into protectionism and fanatic nationalism, but rather adjustment of these rules to respect and provide for such policies which promote  human and social rights and sustainable societies. 

An  Agenda for Action should include: 
1. A full review of the current WTO Agreements and their implications in terms of broad social and health policies. 2. These implications should be assessed and discussed as part of democratic governance. National level Health and Social Policies Ministries should be adequately informed about and capacities to analyse and bring forward their views as part of a democratic process. 3. In the international scene, discussions and decisions on disputes concerning public health and safety issues should be shifted to the most appropriate United Nations bodies (e.g. WHO, ILO, FAO, etc.) rather than dealt with in the more closed DSB of the WTO. 4. Agreements made in the WTO should allow for adequate adjustment for poorer countries and for social and environmental concerns. 5. The influence of strongest transnational actors and lobbying groups for private industries should be balanced to make room for the needs of less global and small scale local producers everywhere. 

 *partie=titre This paper draws a great deal from Mery Koivusalo's World Trade Organisation and Trade-Creep in Health and Social Policies. GASSP Occasional Papers No.4/1999. Helsinki, STAKES.  *partie=nil 

From the 24 - 28 of May, 2001, we the under mentioned civil society organisations from West, Eastern, Southern, Northern Africa, and the Middle East met in Accra, Ghana.  Our objective was to discuss the pressing challenges facing the people in African and other developing countries in the global economic system, and to develop a framework of activities for civil society organisations to confront these challenges.  We paid particular attention to the World Trade Organisation, the Cotonou Agreement, and the US -Africa Growth and Opportunity Act, and the dangers they pose to the democratic rights and development of African economies and the equitable needs of their peoples. In relation to these, we have deliberated upon the following issues and reached the following conclusions. 

Agreements, processes and the institution of the World Trade Organisation (WTO) are imbalanced against African and other developing countries.  In essence, the agreements (in particular on agriculture, TRIMS, TRIPS, services) serve principally to prise open markets for the benefit of transnational corporations at the expense of national economies, workers, farmers, women and other groups in the developing world, and the environment. The WTO system, rules and procedures are undemocratic, untransparent and non-accountable and have operated to marginalize the majority of the people of Africa and the world's people. 

Those governments that dominate the WTO, and that, together with the transnational corporations have benefited from the WTO system, have refused to recognise and address these problems. Instead, they have been pushing for further liberalisation through the introduction of new issues for adoption in the WTO. 

Thousands of civil society groups from Africa and all over the world have continued to campaign against the inequities of the WTO system, and the system of global economic regulation represented by it. 

Before and during the failed Ministerial Conference of the WTO in Seattle, African civil society groups joined thousands of civil society groups the world over to oppose the use of the Ministerial Conference to launch a new round of comprehensive liberalisation, demanding instead, a turnaround of the global system.   Since Seattle, civil society organisations the world over have continued to campaign to take out of the WTO, issues that do not belong to its sphere, as well as to revise existing agreements,  in order to protect livelihoods and the right to development of peoples. 

 Civil society groups have not been alone in making these demands. African and other developing countries governments also sought redress for the imbalances and inequities of the existing WTO agreements, which have damaged their economies and threatened the livelihoods of their peoples. At the same time, they opposed the introduction of new issues in the WTO, and demanded an end to the undemocratic processes of the WTO that marginalized them.  Since Seattle, these governments have continued to exert strenuous efforts to keep their demands alive in the WTO. 

 However, the concerns of civil society and the demands by developing country governments have been ignored by the major powers in the WTO. Negotiations on the concrete proposals put forward by developing countries for the review of the agreements in such areas as Agriculture, TRIPS,  TRIMs and services have been frustrated by the developed countries. At the same time, the latter have used negotiations in areas such as services to exert pressure for further liberalisation, ignoring the concerns of civil society for the  protection of social services and needs. 

In the light of all this, we will strengthen our efforts in the on-going campaigns, actions and alliances in Africa and the world, to change the unfair and oppressive multilateral trade system embodied by the WTO and other trade agreements,  to reverse the destructive effects of the current global economic order, as part of the processes and efforts for an equitable, balanced and sustainable economic development based on the needs of African people and their priorities. 
 
*{ By Third World Network Africa 
 
Original document ATTAC Newsletter 85 http://attac.org/listen.htm }

 Instead, the US, EU, Canada, and Japan have continued to put pressure on developing countries for the launch of a new round to begin negotiating new agreements, in such areas as investment, competition policy and government procurement.   In furtherance of this, and as part of their determination to launch a new round at the next WTO Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar, these countries have resorted to the same undemocratic and non-transparent processes, as well as, the blatant bullying and divisive tactics that were in evidence in Seattle. 

 At the recently concluded United Nations Conference on LDCs, governments of the developed countries as well the WTO secretariat attempted unsuccessfully to use the desperate needs of LDCs (34 of the 48 of which are in Africa) to force them to agree to a new round. 

 Earlier, in November 2000, the US and the EU colluded with the WTO secretariat to use the Ministerial Workshop in Libreville, Gabon as an attempt to force African ministers to support the launching of a new round. This was in utter disregard of the Africa's own decisions, taken by their collective decision-making structures, opposing the new round and calling for the review of existing WTO agreements. 

Regional and bilateral agreements with African countries have also been utilised by developed countries to introduce the issues that they have difficulty introducing in the WTO.  Through the domestic law enacted by the US, the so-called African Growth and Opportunity Act (AGOA), African countries are pressured to adopt WTO-like, and even WTO-plus, provisions relating to intellectual property rights protection, investment and financial liberalisation.  These are all in exchange for some illusory benefits.  AGOA is being used to trap African governments into giving up their legitimate rights under the WTO, and to secure opportunities for US businesses to the detriment of African domestic economic development 

 The Cotonou Agreement is similar.  It sustaining existing aid relationships between Europe and ACP countries.  However, the trade component of the agreement contains provisions requiring African governments' compliance with a range of measures contained in the WTO agreements. It calls for full compliance with the TRIPS Agreement of the WTO. It requires African governments to negotiate for adoption of provisions on competition and investor protection that the European Union is seeking in the WTO, where they are being opposed by African governments.  In addition, it provides for the negotiation of reciprocal free trade agreements between the EU and African countries, separately or in regional groupings.  This will prejudice agricultural production, and industrial development within national or  regional development. 

 Both the Cotonou Agreement and AGOA will pressure African countries to continue implementation of structural adjustment policies, while dividing them and undermine Africa's efforts at regional integration. Underlying Economic Problems 

The pressing problems of economic development facing African countries have grown worse. The developed countries, and international financial institutions dominated by them, IMF and the World Bank have refused to seriously consider the means of resolving Africa's debt problem. Instead, the debt burden continues to be utilised as an instrument to force African governments to continue  - through the so-called HIPC programme and the Poverty Reduction Strategy Programmes (PRSPs) - with the structural adjustment policies that severely damage our economies, harm our people and aggravate the debt crisis. 

 Women are disproportionately affected by these problems.  The current trade regime excarbates their subordination, in particular the exploitation of women's labour which underpins the free market system, and enables the perpetuation of gender, class and national inequities in the global system. 

 *partie=titre  OUR DEMANDS AND COMMITMENTS  *partie=nil 
 
In the light of all this, we will strengthen our efforts in the on-going campaigns, actions and alliances in Africa and the world, to change the unfair and oppressive multilateral trade system embodied by the WTO and other trade agreements,  to reverse the destructive effects of the current global economic order, as part of the processes and efforts for an equitable, balanced and sustainable economic development based on the needs of African people and their priorities. To these ends we make the following: 

 In relation to the WTO 
 We are opposed to the launch at the forthcoming WTO Ministerial Conference in Doha, Qatar of a new round of comprehensive negotiations. 
 For a gender-sensitive, sustainable, equitable and democratically accountable system of international economic relations, we endorse and reiterate the demands in the global civil society platform statement, WTO: Shrink or Sink, in particular: 
 - there must be no further expansion of WTO, by bringing in new issues, such as investment, competition, government procurement, biotechnology, and accelerated tariff liberalisation; 
- social rights and services should be protected; therefore health, education, energy and other rights and services must not be subject to liberalisation under the General Agreement on Services (GATS); 
- patenting of life forms must be prohibited, and furthermore, the TRIPS Agreement, a protectionist instrument which promotes corporate monopoly, restricts developing countries' access to technology, and denies the poor access to essential medicines, should be removed from the WTO; 
- measures taken to promote and protect food security, food sovereignty and small-scale agriculture and enterprise must be exempt from WTO trade disciplines; 
- the effective operationalisation and expansion of special and differential rights for third world countries, that recognise fully the weak position of developing countries in the international trading system and that provides them space to participate in the global economy according their own needs; and 
- the decision-making processes and the dispute settlement system of the WTO must be reformed to democratic, transparent and equitable. 

- We  oppose the free trade pressures within the Cotonou Agreement; and 
- We call for effective and coordinated negotiating strategies, in order to develop alternative trade arrangements that support nationally and regionally defined priorities for development. 
 In relation to AGOA 
- The aims and interests propelling AGOA and the forthcoming Bush summit must be resisted by African governments and their peoples; 
-  African governments must desist from taking measures intended to satisfy the eligibility requirements under the Act; 

 OUR ACTIVITIES 
In order to realise the above demands, we will undertake the following activities 
- jointly, or individually, and with other groups and allies; 
- in our countries, in our sub-regions, continentally and globally; 
- with our diverse range of constituencies; and 
- in relation to governments, economic and trade policy decision-making bodies, at the national, sub-regional, continental, and global levels. 
 We understand that conditions differ from country to country, from region to region; and among different constituencies.  Therefore these activities represent options that we can pursue according to our respective circumstances.  And we will offer support to each other, and share resources as appropriate, in solidarity with initiatives led by groups in their own contexts. 
 As part of the global social movements  for alternatives, we are committed to pursuit of just, equitable and sustainable alternatives to the current global system. 

*{ Signatories 
Abantu for Development, Ghana - Alternative Information Development Centre (AIDC), South Africa  - Arab NGO Network for Development, Lebanon  - Centre for Trade Unions and Workers Services (CTUWS), Egypt - Counsel des ONG d'Appui au Development (CONGAD), Senegal - ECONEWS Africa - Kenya - ENDA - TM, Senegal - Environmental Rights Action (FOE- Nigeria) - Espace Associatif, Morocco - Friends of the Earth - GHANA - Gender and Trade (GENTA), Benin  - Gender Studies and Human Rights Documentation Centre, Ghana - General Agricultural Workers Union (GAWU), Ghana - Inter Press Service (IPS)-Burkina Faso  - Inter Press Service (IPS)-Nairobi  - IPS - Zimbabwe - Journalists for Democratic Rights, Nigeria - Les Amis de la Tere (FOE -Togo) - MOSOP - Nigeria Environmental and Human Rights Group - Nigeria Labour Congress  - NLC  - Organisation of African Trade Unions Unity - Ghana - Organisation of African Trade Unions Unity, Ghana  - Oxfam GB West African Regional Program, Senegal - Railways Artisans Union - Zimbabwe Congress of Trade Unions - Third World Network - Africa, Ghana - Worldview International - The Gambia 
Third World Network-Africa; 9 Ollenu Street, East Legon; P O Box AN19452; Accra-North; Ghana tel: 233 21 511189/503669/500419 fax: 233 21 511188 email: twnafrica@ghana.com  }

'There is a development deficit. The marginalisation of many developing countries in the global economy is an attestation to this fact. And this is a true reality check. It is clear we are in a sate of impasse. We characterise the situation as discouraging, discomforting, demoralising and in some instances, even depressing'. 
Malaysia's Statement at the WTO General Council Meeting in Preparation for Doha Ministerial Conference 30 July 2001. 
The World Trade Organisation conducted a 'reality check' to assess how close or far apart Members were in agreeing on a common agenda for the Ministerial in Doha in November. In preparation for this assessment, a report on the current state of preparatory work for Doha was issued by the Chair of the General Council, Harbinson and WTO's Director General, Moore (Job (01)/118). 
Developing countries, angered by the biased process of consultations so far, the lack of progress in areas of interest to them, as well as in disparagement over the lack of accurate representation in the report on specific issues, used the opportunity of this 'reality check' to voice their concerns. 
Two main issues were highlighted by developing countries: 1) There has been no progress at all on implementation issues - any such report by the chair is being overly optimistic and 'not factual'. 2) That there is no growing consensus on the new round - as the Chair and DG's report seem to suggest. 
In private interview, a delegate from Africa said that the report 'was not a reality check. We do not think it reflects what went on in the consultations. It is quite imbalanced in the way weight is given to one position over another'. Pakistan's Ambassador Akram, in the WTO General Council, said that the report, 'reflects a sense of underlying optimism, which we believe, may not be justified by the realities on the ground'. 

Developing Countries' Assessment of Reality: Process 'Depressing', No Movement on Implementation, No growing consensus on New Round, No Agreement on New Issues, No Internal Transparency 
Developing Countries Find Preparatory Process for Doha 'Depressing': 
In general, developing countries expressed frustration that there really has been no movement in the Doha preparation on issues of interest to them. The process so far, has concentrated on trying to get agreement on new issues (pushed by the EU and now US). while implementation issues have been subjected to a process of being increasingly watered down and marginalised. 
Malaysia, voiced that 'by focussing mainly on the issues that are currently outside the scope of the WTO, we create the impression that these are the only main issues that would make or break the Doha Ministerial Conference. Clever drafting cannot resolve fundamental difficulties and this has to be recognised.It is clear we are in a state of impasse. We characterise the situation as discouraging, discomforting, demoralising and in some instances, even depressing'. 



 *partie=titre Developing Countries In Despair Over WTO Preparations For Doha  *partie=nil 

Developing countries, angered by the biased process of consultations so far, the lack of progress in areas of interest to them, as well as in disparagement over the lack of accurate representation in the report on specific issues, used the opportunity of this 'reality check' to voice their concerns. 
 
*{ By Ailen Kwa 
Focus on the Global South www.focusweb.org 
 
Original document ATTAC Newsletter 92: http://attac.org/listen.htm  
}

India's Ambassador Narayanan, commenting on DG Mike Moore's opening statement, that without a launch of a round, the WTO would be rendered 'irrelevant' said at the meeting: 
'I have to say that his argument is not particularly convincing.I am afraid the approach suggested by the Director General ignores past experience of developing countries, current realities of power equations and obvious future risk. It is a matter of some regret for me that the Director General who has been a close observer of the way the implementation issues are handled by the major trading partners for nearly two years now, should be advising developing countries to accept new asymmetries and imbalances in order to remove past asymmetries and imbalances. In this context, my own assessment is that a new comprehensive round of negotiations, mainly aimed at removing even the limited policy space available to developing countries in area of crucial development interests to them, will only result in a net additionality to the existing asymmetries and imbalances'. 

Ambassador Akram, of Pakistan, commenting on the process and the report said, 
'Mr Chairman, we may have spent 35 plenary meetings in preparing for Doha. But I think if we are frank with each other, we should admit that we have not moved very far forward on the road to Doha.' 

 *partie=titre  No Movement on Implementation  *partie=nil 
Implementation issues has been highest on the agenda of developing countries at the WTO. 'Implementation' represents the broken promises, and inequities which have emerged as a result of the Uruguay Round package for the South  - for example, in TRIMS, TRIPS, Agriculture, Textiles, Anti-dumping. Since Seattle, much time has been spent on some topics under 'implementation', but with no results because the developed countries have been unwilling to yield. 

Addressing the inherently biased nature of the WTO's QUAD-and-Secretariat-driven negotiating process, Pakistan, criticising the Chair and DG's report said: 
'Particularly in the area of implementation, it is impossible to conclude that there are, I quote, 'welcome advances' or 'positive developments' or 'some headway in the process'. On the contrary, there has been an obvious lack of political will on the part of our major trading partners even to engage in discussions and negotiations, much less to respond positively, to the concerns and proposals relating to implementation. In fact, virtually no consultations were even convened with regard to two of the major areas of Implementation ie Textiles and Anti-dumping.' 

Akram then posed the questions: 'Are the major trading partners politically incapable of responding positively to the main Implementation concerns of the developing countries? Some of the news that we read may indicate that that may be the case. Alternatively, are they holding back their responses on implementation issues mainly for tactical reasons, in order to extract concessions from developing countries on their ambitions and objectives for Doha?' 

India also pointed out in their intervention that of the 97 tirets on implementation issues in the draft ministerial text for Seattle, decision on 3 tirets were taken in December 2000. 

According to India, 'If you take into consideration the fact that most of the implementation proposals have been on the table for nearly 3 years now, the fact that these issues and concerns have to be addressed and resolved latest by the Doha Ministerial Conference which is barely three and a half months away, the fact that subsequent to December 2000 when only three decisions were taken, no decision has been taken on any implementation-related proposal.' 

In sum, India's view was that 'there is no significant change in the attitude of the major trading partners.I would say that the element in your report which indicates that the 'progress at this stage in achieving concrete results has not been as rapid as might have been hoped' is a gross under-statement'. In fact, India's Ambassador Narayanan went on to say that 'we are terribly disappointed and distressed about the lack of progress in dealing meaningfully with implementation issues and concerns which have been on the table for a long time now'. 

Zimbabwe, speaking on behalf of the African group, also said that on implementation issues, 'we can all agree that more progress will be required before Doha. Quite frankly, the current situation is far from satisfactory and challenges us to intensify the search for urgent and meaningful solutions'. 
Malaysia also commented that they were 'very disappointed that there has not been any substantial outcome on any of the implementation related concerns, and we wish to remind Members of the General Council Decision to resolve these matters at the latest by the Fourth Ministerial Conference'. 

 *partie=titre No Agreement on New Issues, No Consensus on New Round  *partie=nil 

The LDCs, fresh from their Minsiterial meetingin Zanibar, reiterated the position taken there. Representing the LDCs, Tanzania said that 'Ministers considered the socalled Singapore issues that include investment, competition policy, environment, transparency in government procurement and trade facilitation. Given the fact that the issues are complex, and divergent views exist and that the new issues are yet to be fully understood, especially regarding their implications on LDCs' development, the Ministers were of the view that the study process should continue in the working groups and that time is not ripe for LDCs to undertake negotiations for multilateral regimes on these areas'. 

Pakistan, on the same subject said: 'We note that considerable time has been spent on consultations relating to some of these issues, and some of the 35 meetings have been expended on this exercise; certainly more time on these issues than on the issues relating to Textiles and Antidumping. But, we see little prospect of bridging the gap and reaching consensus on a negotiating mandates for these issues.' 
Malaysia also stated in no uncertain terms that they were not interested in any of the new subjects  - investment, competition or trade facilitation. In fact, on trade facilitation, Malaysia said 'My delegation is unable to accept the report's assertion that there seems to be some degree of acceptance that a negotiating mandate would probably be that as outlined in paragraph 25. It was clear from the consultations that apprehension remained as to whether new rules were needed.' 

On behalf of the African group, Zimbabwe in the meeting, commenting on the Chair and DG's report on new issues said: 'I must say with all frankness that we are disappointed by the way in which these differences have been portrayed. For example, on the relationship between trade and investment. your Report says some members want the work of the working group 'prolonged'. This reflects a judgement on the time frame. The issue here is for the Working Group to complete its task / fulfil its mandate, and not merely prolonging its existence.' 

 *partie=titre India's Assessment of Current Situation  *partie=nil 
Ambassador Narayanan, seemed to voice many developing countries' perceptions of the process so far. He said that India's assessment of the current reality was that a) Without meaningful results on implementation issues and concerns, Doha Ministerial is unlikely to succeed b) There is no great enthusiasm for a comprehensive round involving a wide variety of new subjects as proposed by some major trading partners; in fact, there is considerable amount of resistance; c) The 'all or nothing approach' is risky in as much as it is likely to result in 'nothing' rather than 'all' 
Green Room, Non-transparent Consultations Continue Mike Moore, referring to the issue of internal transparency in Doha preparations, said that 'internal transparency and participation have been greatly improved'. He backed this statement by stating that 35 plenary meetings of the Council, formal and informal devoted to the Doha process have been conducted. 

Contrary to his assertion, however, Jamaica, commenting on this Doha process at the informal General Council meeting held on the 27th July (in preparation for the 'reality check') said that they were very disappointed that they have been left out of the informal consultations that have been going on. 
The truth of the matter is that Green Room consultations still take place in proliferation. Many developing country delegates are not invited to the myriad informals organised each day on different topics. This lack of internal transparency makes it much easier for the majors in the WTO to split the ranks of developing countries when push comes to shove. 

Looming Pitfalls For the South While developing countries seem to be holding their ground for the time being, pressures on them are now intensifying from all sides. According to an Asean delegate, there will be increasing pressure tactics from the EU and others. Many African and Latin American countries do not want the launch of a new round. However, many rely on Aid and trade preferences. 'One call to your boss, to tell your man to cool off. That's all it takes. We can expect this in the days to come'. 

African countries in particular, will be targeted with pressures of all forms. The powerful driving the WTO, afterall, need their compliance to prove that even the poorest are in agreement. Indeed, the proponents of a new round have been using Egypt in the North, and South Africa in the South, to work on their African colleagues. Kenya in the East and Gabon in the West have also been targeted to change their positions and become ring-leaders for a new round. 

The battleground has shifted, from Geneva back to capitals. Unless trade ministers, under pressure from the powerful countries also feel the heat from civil society resistance in the next two months, it is unlikely that they will be able to stand their ground. With meagre offerings of market openings, aid packages and more technical assistance, Doha could launch a limited new trade round, with a mandate that gets expanded as the round progresses. 

One prominent NGO leader from the South, commenting on this possible eventuality, said that should a new round be launched, Genoa may just be a daily reality in Geneva next year.  
 

 *partie=titre  17 CONCLUSIONS OF THE WORKSHOP  *partie=nil 

A. Introduction 

1. The activities of Transnational Companies are dominated by one essential goal: that of achieving maximum profit over the shortest possible time period, which is the result both of a competition logic in the globalized capitalist economy and also of the unlimited ambition for power and wealth of its foremost leaders. 

This essential goal will not allow any obstacle to stand in its way, and all methods are acceptable in order to achieve it, from the violation of labor law, the appropriation of knowledge which is by nature social, corruption of political elites, intellectuals and the leaders of "civil society", right through to the financing (with the logistic support of some big power or other) of terrorist activities (paramilitary groups, mercenaries, private militias and others), such as coups d'_tat and bloodthirsty dictatorships. 
Such behavior runs counter to respect of human rights in general, including the right to life, health, to freely chosen and decently paid work, to communication and to objective and impartial information, and so on, and violates the right to free self-determination of peoples. 

2. Although the influence of economic power over political power has been a constant factor in human society ever since the existence of economic power, in the last decades, as a result of the enormous power accumulated by Transnational Companies in all spheres (at present Transnational Companies shape tastes, habits, behaviors and the ideas we hold), it can be seen that there is a clear increase in economic power at the expense of political power which puts into question the idea of representative democracy and the role of national and international political institutions as mediators  ­ or supposed mediators  ­ between different or contradictory interests. 

This can be seen in the trend which leaders of States and of international interstate organizations show when they deliberately secede decision-making power and the functions which are inherent to political institutions to more powerful economic groups under the pretext or with the label of "participation of civil society" and "social actors". This allows such groups, particularly large Transnational Companies, to develop their strategy on a world scale and to influence policy direction in accordance with their own interests. 

Indeed, the very structures of some international bodies such as the IMF and the World Bank and the WTO have been conceived to function in the service of such interests. 
Another consequence of the growing supremacy of economic power is the attempt to replace the normative function of the State with private rules and regulations, voluntary Codes of Conduct, and so on, which lack three essential elements which characterize legal norms: 

a) that the procedure for their drafting and of sanctions is established in the Constitution or the organic law of the State and that it is presumed that they express the wish of the citizens ("Laws do not oblige because they are accepted by the wish of the people ...   the people will dictate its wish through suffrage" (Digesto romano, Lib. 1 tit. III, 32, paragraph I)); 5                                               

Acts and Conclusions of the Celigny Seminar (Château de Bossey, near Geneva) May 4 and 5, 2001 Organized by AAJ (American Association of Jurists) and CETIM (Europe - Third World Center)  
 
Our fears are supported by the overall line taken in these matters by the United Nations in the past few years: the work of the Center on Transnational Companies (or Enterprises), initially set up as a body of ECOSOC in 1974 and transformed and transferred to UNCTAD with new terms of reference in 1993 by a decision of the United Nations Secretary-General, was put to an end in 1994. The same thing happened in 1994 with the Commission on Transnational Companies (or Enterprises). This policy of pandering to the interests of the transnational corporations culminated in July 2000 with the adoption of the so-called Global Compact, which the Secretary-General of the UN celebrated in the company of the representatives of some of the major TNCs. 

*{  
Conclusions (p. 17) 
Seminar Briefs (p. 21) 
 
Published in collaboration with the CETIM Centre Europe Tiers Monde - http://www.cetim.ch/ - http://
www.cetim.ch/activ/activeng.htm 
Original document: http://attac.org/fra/toil/doc/cetimen.htm 

}

b) that they are mandatory for all; 

c) that their violation or unfulfillment leads to a sanction which emanates from a legal or administrative source. 

It is therefore necessary to re-establish the basic role of politics so that all citizens can have equal rights, whatever their economic or social position, through representative and participatory democracy, in the adoption of decisions, in the monitoring of their implementation and in the evaluation of their results, and it also necessary to salvage the primacy of law as an expression of popular will. 
Therefore it is both imperative and urgent to move to democratization of the international organizations and to ensure the transparency of their functioning. 

 *partie=titre B. The legal Framework for Transnational Companies  *partie=nil 
 
1. Codes of Conduct which are voluntary cannot replace norms dictated by national state bodies and international interstate bodies. Only the latter are true legal norms, by their nature compulsory, which where they are not complied with lead to sanctions. 
Furthermore, experience and studies carried out show that voluntary Codes of Conduct are unexhaustive, their application depends on whether the company wishes to implement them or not and there is no true external independent control. 

Voluntary Codes of Conduct are private initiatives and, therefore, lie outside the norm-setting activity of States and the norm-setting activity (Conventions, Resolutions, Declarations, etc.) or incitement to promote norms (Guidelines, Declarations of Principle, etc.) of interstate international organizations whose direct addressees are States and individuals are only included indirectly. 

However, some lawyers believe that not complying with such Codes of Conduct even where voluntary can be invoked on the basis of the principle that an obligation that is assumed unilaterally is also incumbent on an interested third party and thus a company which falsely claims that it has implemented and respects a voluntary Code of Conduct could be alleged to be guilty of unfair competition. 

However, even mandatory Codes of Conduct are intended to regulate specific questions and not to supplant national legislation which must supervise general consequences and indirect effects of the activities of Transnational Companies. 

2. It is necessary to adopt principles for the legal framework, therefore, for the Transnational Companies which begin from the following basic premises: 

a) national communities and the  international community are legal communities under public law, the concept is formed on a legal basis (of national and international norms), which, regardless of whether in fact they are respected to a lesser or greater extent and regardless of the level of their evolution, constitute a point of reference which cannot be ignored for establishing the rules of the game for living in harmony. 

b) Such norms are compulsory both for legal bodies and also for individuals. 

c) Transnational Companies are legal entities and therefore are subjects and objects of public law. So that legal norms are also compulsory for Transnational Companies. 

d) Legal norms which are in effect are also compulsory for the leaders of Transnational Companies. 3. What needs to be done is to make the principle of criminal liability for legal entities more widespread: a concept which is already incorporated in various national legislation, and in a non-binding way, in the Convention of the United Nations against Transnational Organized Crime of the year 2000 and in a binding manner in the 1999 European Penal Convention on Corruption. The principle of dual indictment must also become more widespread, that is to say that the  legal entity can be sanctioned and so can the individuals concerned (leaders within the company) who take or consent to the decision which is being sanctioned. 

4. We must establish in what way the legal framework for Transnational Companies and for their managers can be made effective within national and international norms in effect, how sanctions are to be carried out or reparations, in the case of non-compliance with or transgression of these norms. 

5. It is also necessary to consolidate and to develop the specific norms which exist relating to Transnational Companies, to strengthen legislation with regard to private monopolies, paying particular attention to essential services for the community and to mass communication means and infrastructure and it is necessary to establish mandatory Codes of Conduct for Transnational Companies which include the question of transfer of technology. 

6. The problem of hetereogeneity, dispersal and sometimes contradiction of the norms in effect under international law in various spheres is also apparent when examining the question of the legal framework for Transnational Companies. In order to have a minimum of consistency between international instruments, it is necessary to establish a hierarchy for them, starting from the principle that the interests of the general public or the common good should prevail, as should fundamental rights and the dignity of human beings, in a framework of justice and equity which does not recognize privileges, advantages or exceptions for any social actors due to their economic, political or social power. 

 *partie=titre I. Legal Characteristics of Transnational Companies  *partie=nil 
 
Transnational Companies are legal entities under private law which act in different States but with one single or main decision-making centre. Its transnational nature does not allow it to be seen as an international legal entity although it can be a subject of international law just as individuals can, as is the case at present in international doctrine and practice. In the current state of international law the only international legal entities are entities under public law, States and interstate organizations. 

 *partie=titre II. Economic and financial Characteristics  *partie=nil 
 
The dispersed and multiple nature of the activities of Transnational Companies the constant merger-takeovers and changes of name, the frequent difficulty for the consumer to connect a good or a service with a particular company, and so on, are elements which help to sustain the argument that the present economic system is constituted of a complex web of phenomena which are impossible to place spatially and temporally and that Transnational Companies do not exist as real entities and as physical representatives of the system. 

However, as was said in the Introduction, Transnational Companies exercise a strong and real influence on political, economic and social activity which is irrefutable proof that they are not virtual entities. And their top leaders have names and surnames, appear often in specialized reviews and in political journals and sometimes in the legal register. All of which allows us to affirm that the difficulty we find in visualizing the Transnational Companies (which a thorough study will help us to overcome) does not mean that they do not exist.
 
Transnational Companies are present in production, trade, in research and in services ­ in almost all spheres of activity ­ and also in financial speculation, either directly using its own capital or accepting as company capital the entry of funds from managers of institutional investment pension funds, or from insurance company funds, and so on, and in this way these persons have a say in the decisions of the companies so that their investment produces the high profit expected. 

The companies carry out these activities either separately, together or alternately. In their activities they include different national territories, varying with rapidity and relative frequency the places where they set up or where they invest capital, in accordance with their strategy based on the objective of highest profit (quest for cheap labor, fiscal advantages, state subsidies, being close to the source of raw materials, close to the consumer market, flexible regulations and/or more favorable such regulations, high interest rates for their speculative capital, etc. ) They can function with a parent company and branches, creating groups of same sector activities, conglomerates or coalitions bringing together diverse activities, uniting through a merger or absorption or constituting financial groups (holdings). In all these cases (parent company/branches, groups, conglomerates, coalitions and holdings) the most important decisions are taken centrally. 

They can have a legal domicile in one or several countries: in that of the actual headquarters of the parent company, in that of the headquarters of their main activities and/or in the country where the company is registered. However, a nationality can always be assigned in fact to the company in the sense that there will be a State which supports or defends their interests (in the WTO, the IMF, the WB and other international organizations or through military or political means or through other means). 
It is often the case that the activity which is really productive is delegated to subcontractors and that the Transnational Company has the know-how, the brand and the marketing. 

 *partie=titre III. Responsibility of States and of the International Community for the Actions of Transnational Companies  *partie=nil 

1. The right to development and to a progressive increase in enjoyment of economic social and cultural rights places obligations on the international community and each State member with regard to their own peoples and to humanity in general, to the extent of their available resources. And these obligations mean the duty of every State to make maximum efforts to promote economic, social and cultural progress for its people. The obligations of the State in terms of economic social and cultural rights exist not only with regard to their own peoples but also those of all peoples. They are the so-called "solidarity rights" the respect and promotion of which obliges all the international community. 

States are also responsible when they fail in their duty of due diligence or vigilance in the prevention and punishment of violations of human rights (on their own territory or trans-nationally) which are committed by individuals which are found under their jurisdiction, according to what has been established in the fundamental instruments and to international practice. In particular numerous international conventions and arbitration cases (the Trail Foundry and others) have established the subsidiary responsibility of States in the sphere of preservation of the environment. 

 *partie=titre IV. Applicable Norms  *partie=nil 
 
1. Transnational companies like all individuals, are civilly and criminally responsible for the violation or nonfulfillment of norms in effect, both international norms, most of which are applicable under domestic law, and national norms. 

2. Responsibility for violations is shared by the parent company and the branch which transgressed the norms, and in groups, conglomerates or holdings by the company which was directly responsible and by the coordinating company of the group, conglomerate or holding whose managing body took or approved of the decision. 

3. Transnational Companies are also responsible for transgressions committed by subcontracting companies, as co-authors or participants (accomplices, etc) in criminal terms, and in a general way, as beneficiaries of the illegal conduct. 

4. States are internationally responsible for the implementation within domestic law of the majority of international norms as binding or obligatory through their nature as "jus cogens" amongst them the Universal Declaration on Human Rights, the international Pacts and Conventions on human rights, conventions and recommendations of the ILO, various resolutions and declarations of the General Assembly and of International Conferences (on the right to development, protection of the environment, permanent sovereignty over national resources, corruption, economic crime, etc.) and other regional and international instruments on various matters. 

5. The many activities of Transnational Companies include the sphere of the illicit, which is a grey area between legality and illegality and open crime. The characteristics which define organized transnational crime correspond perfectly to the habitual practice of large Transnational Companies: a permanent transnational structure, division and control of territories and markets, zones of influence to obtain the highest profits and indifference with regard to a deleterious outcome for third parties in terms of the means employed to achieve the result. With the peculiarity in the case of Transnational Companies that with the aid of large powers and of the IMF, the WB and the WTO the means employed include coups d'Etat, the promotion and backing of dictatorial régimes,  terrorism and military, political and economic extortion, etc. And that the deleterious outcome can consist of violations of fundamental human rights for a large part of the world population. Amongst the international instruments which are applicable we should mention the Convention of the United Nations against Organized Transnational Crime (the Palermo Convention), adopted by the General Assembly on 15 November 2000 and the OECD Convention against Corruption, in effect since  February 1999 although both instruments are characterized by their excessive flexibility, because they grant a wide margin for decisions to States Parties. The European Penal Convention on Corruption, open for signature from 27 January 1999, is much more exhaustive and binding. 

6. It is possible to invoke article 7 in court as a right in effect (crimes against humanity) of the Statute of the International Criminal Court (Rome 1998) against leaders of Transnational Companies, particularly its paragraphs 1 c) (torture [which includes other degrading, inhuman or cruel punishment or treatment according to the relevant Convention]); 1 k) (other inhuman acts ...   which cause great suffering or seriously attack the physical integrity or physical or mental health) and 2 b) [extermination] (intentionally inflict living conditions inter alia the deprivation of access to food or medication... ). Also article 11 paragraph c) of the Convention for the Prevention and Sanction of the Crime of Genocide can also be invoked: .."the intentional submission of a group to living conditions which will lead to their physical destruction, whether partial or total." 

7. Civil and criminal liability must have as a consequence not only the sanction for the violation or non fulfillment but also reparations for damage caused and, where possible, the re-establishment of the statu quo ante. 

8. The norms in existence must be included in national and international plans: 
a) The notion of public service must be reinstated, especially in terms of health, food, education, habitat, communication and information in all forms and support must be provided to prevent and prohibit the formation of private oligopolies and monopolies in these spheres. 
b) Strengthening the mechanisms for application of specific instruments referring to Transnational Companies, such as the Declaration of Tripartite Principles on Transnational Companies and the Social Policy of the ILO (which in its amendment of November 2000 referred to 30 Conventions and 35 Recommendations of the ILO) and the Guidelines of the OECD (revised text in June 2000), although this last only formulates recommendations to companies. 
c) Establishing mandatory Codes of Conduct for Transnational Companies as was asked for in the Declaration and Program of Action of the Millennium Forum (United Nations, New York, 26 May 2000, item 2 of Section A of the Declaration), by more than 1000 NGOs from 100 countries. Such Codes of Conduct must include the question of technology transfer. 
d) Bringing the violations of human, civil, political, economic, social and cultural rights together under one violation of fundamental human rights (as well as a violation of the relevant norm). For example, being deprived of somewhere to live is a violation of the right to a private life (as well as being a violation of other fundamental rights) and not adopting measures against extreme poverty (or adopting measures which cause poverty) constitutes inhuman or degrading treatment that is equivalent to torture; the deprivation of access to adequate food or to essential medication represents a violation of rights to health and life, and so forth. 
e) Extending the current trend to make individuals responsible internationally (Statute of the International Criminal Court) and that of direct international responsibility for private legal entities. 
f) States which have not done so, must incorporate into their legislation criminal liability for legal entities, without hiding behind the excessive flexibility of article 10 of the Convention of the UN against Organized Transnational Crime and the OECD Convention against Corruption, which allows States to choose between criminal, civil or administrative sanctions for legal entities. 
The principle of dual indictment must also become universal, so that Transnational Companies are criminally liable for the crimes they commit, yet so are the managers who approve them, in accordance with the statutes and with their affirmative vote or omission to vote against, on the decisions which are indicted. The applicable norms, both for companies as for individuals, whether in their quality as authors, accomplices, instigators, necessary participants, and so on, should be placed in national legislations and in international instruments. 

 *partie=titre V. Competent Jurisdictions  *partie=nil 
 
1. As was pointed out in the preceding Chapter, norms applicable to Transnational Companies exist although with serious loopholes. However, the mechanisms to apply such norms directly on private legal entities, amongst them Transnational Companies, are totally non-existent in international terms. Nor does the Statute approved in Rome confer competency to the future International. 
Criminal Court to judge legal entities nor crimes against economic, social and cultural rights, although if the Court is established individuals can inform the Public Prosecutor (they cannot file complaints nor act as a plaintiff) about violations of human rights  committed by Transnational Companies, so that the Public Prosecutor can decide whether to investigate and accuse the individuals responsible. The options offered in this regard by the future International Criminal Court in the Statute as it stands at present are very limited. 

2. In regional and international plans there are judicial and administrative jurisdictions, the system of arbitration courts and the so-called quasi jurisdictional proceedings, some accessible to individuals and others not, but in which it is only the States which can be the subject of an action, also as subsidiaries responsible for the actions of individual entities including Transnational Companies. 
Amongst the mechanisms which exist one could cite the Interamerican Court and the European Tribunal for Human Rights, the International Court of Justice (only accessible to States) which since 1993 has had a Chamber on the environment; the proceedings before four of the Committees on International Pacts and Conventions (human rights, women rights, [TRANSLATOR'S NOTE: SHOULDN'T THIS BE RIGHTS OF THE CHILD?] racial discrimination and torture), the proceedings existing in the International Labor Organization, rules for the presentation of communications in UNESCO, the Additional Protocol of the European Social Chapter, the International Court on the Law of the Sea, the Protocol on the Basel Convention of December 1999, etc. 

3. National tribunals, in contrast, can receive claims and requests against Transnational Companies and their managers (criminal claims against Transnational Companies as such can only be made in the States which agree with regard to criminal liability for legal entities). 
Those making the claim have the option of choosing the jurisdiction of the territory where the damage was produced, or the domicile of the victims, or the domicile of one or instead one of the domiciles of the company or companies responsible and also to apply the increasingly widespread principle of universal jurisdiction. 

4. Jurisdictions and proceedings in existence should be supplemented by: 
a) Approving, with the necessary reforms, the Draft Protocol of the International Covenant on Social, Economic and Cultural Rights, which establishes a procedure for claims before the relevant Committee and the drawing up and approval of a procedure for claims before the Committee on the Rights of the Child. 
b) Establishing direct international liability of private legal entities: 
By amending the Statute of the International Criminal Court in order to establish the competency of the Court to judge legal entities and violations of social, economic and cultural rights and those relating to the environment and allowing victims to act as claimants or plaintiffs and to represent themselves as civil parties in order to obtain reparation for the damage. 
- through the creation of an international court for Transnational Companies, taking its inspiration from the International Court on the Law of the Sea, whose Statute constitutes Annex VI of the Convention on the Law of the Sea (Montego Bay, December 1982). 
- And also through legal channels, by applying the principle of universal jurisdiction. 

 *partie=titre SEMINAR BRIEFS 
The International Status of Transnational Companies 
Brief from the presentation made by Professor Jordi Bonet Perez  *partie=nil 

Professor Bonet Perez stated in his written speech that in general, Transnational Companies are not recognized as international legal entities, although international law does grant them a privileged international status. Although a certain practical legitimacy is granted to them, within the framework of particular international regimes  ­ which is the result of a trend to translate their functional relevance as actors in international relations into a legal capacity for activity­ public international law  is only implemented in their regard through state action, so that they continue to be subject only to domestic law of States. It is not appropriate to change this situation by attributing an international status to TNCs, because their direct participation in the process of creation of legal norms applicable to them and their access to mechanisms for the application of public international law could be at the expense of certain values and essential principles of international law, in view of their discretional function in the economic sphere. Furthermore, to grant them an international legal status could mean that in this way practices of economic pressure which are difficult to accept in terms of human and environmental values could be legitimized and enshrined in international norms. 

In the debate on this issue, it was stated that in no case should international law be applied when contracting with a Transnational Company and that it is unacceptable that a contract should provide for the application of such law, because it would mean that national law is being disregarded and accepting the aspiration of TNCs to evade State control and not be subject to potential nationalization or to sanctions under domestic law. In order for such companies to be held accountable for their actions, it is not necessary to give them an international status, because national legislation contain provisions which are applicable to all companies and there are pacts between States to deal with conflicts which include more than one State. War criminals, for example, are judged without having an international status. Also, there are usually various companies with a central headquarters. Sometimes local companies are not branches but have instead been subcontracted. Which of these should have an international status? 

It was also stated that it is necessary to differentiate between the public and private legal entity. The public entity is that which States, provinces, departments, municipalities and other institutions or offices belonging to these have, that is to say that institutions of the national State and their political and administrative subdivisions are public legal entities. In the international order those entities, which are public legal entities, are States and interstate organizations. Individuals in their own right and other groups or associations of individuals, to which States grant this, have a private identity. But States can also withdraw the legal identity granted in cases established under their laws. In the international order by contrast there is no institution which can grant or withdraw a legal identity, nor are there norms to establish cases when it would be appropriate to grant, withdraw or deny it. TNCs have a private legal identity granted by the countries where their headquarters are. For the moment there is no international private legal identity. As far as international public legal identity is concerned it cannot be conceived for TNCs despite their current economic weight because it would mean they were equivalent to States. 
 
 *partie=titre TNCs and countries of the South  *partie=nil 
 
 *partie=titre Brief from the presentation made by Professor Yash Tandon  *partie=nil 
 
A purely economic analysis is insufficient as an analytical and theoretical tool. It also fails to show the reality which is a world divided between the Empire and those countries which lie outside it: "barbarians". Economism and the ideas which derive from it, such as "growth through adjustment" are in reality ideologies of the Empire which justify the conquest of territories and resources of the "barbarians". Those who would reduce this phenomenon to purely economic terms are ignoring important ingredients of this expansion in terms of culture, religion, government and, of course, the use of violence. 

The world is currently divided into four segments: the First World, or the Anglo-Saxon world, made up of the United States and the United Kingdom, which exerts its hegemony over the empire through markets and military power; the Second World or the lower ranks of the Empire, made up of Europe and  Japan, which share power but which have significant differences with regard to the AngloSaxon countries; the "barbarians" of the Third World, made up of all the countries which were colonies, known as the "South" and the Third or Middle World made up of countries in Eastern Europe, new "barbarians" since the collapse of the Soviet Union. 

The power of TNCs erodes that of States,  particularly in countries in the South. Certain hypotheses must be rejected as false: (a) that TNCs are the most important vehicles for capital, because transnational capital does not necessarily use TNCs as it has many other ways in which it can flow; (b) that the capital of TNCs is necessarily productive and functions using identifiable goods, because there is a large part of speculative capital where this is not the case (only 2.5% of transactions are realised on material goods, the rest is speculation); (c) one should not believe that all damage is to be attributable to TNCs because the volatility of capital produces damaging effects, such as is the case with pension funds, which are invested in risky operations in the very short term and can have catastrophic results if the system undergoes a crisis. Therefore it is important to develop not only the question of liability of TNCs but also of liability with regard to volatile capital. 

The idea that TNCs can be separated from the States must also be rejected. In the countries of the Empire the TNCs wield very great power, but it is perhaps erroneous to believe that they have more power than the State, because they are dependent on it for growth. In the countries of the South the in-flow of foreign capital can endanger the sovereignty of the State (examples: Thailand, where the banking system has been submerged by foreign banks since ANG-Part-II 5 the crisis and Nigeria, where foreign capital undermines the economy of the country), contributing to the exploitation of populations, causing corruption and being at the root cause of much spilt blood. 

We must give up the myth that the situation of countries in the South is improving thanks to the North. Because of the actions of the TNCs, the IMF and the WB, African countries are submerged in a sea of corruption and are considerably weakened. In order to attract capital they become the allies of these companies. Governments have become very authoritarian and oppressive, lacking moral authority and are the first to violate human rights, in order to meet the conditions imposed by these institutions. To hope that  the capitalist Empire will collapse under the weight of its own contradictions could mean waiting forever. The pages of history are written by people, not market forces. As far as Africa is concerned there are two roads: neoliberal, meaning that countries in Africa will integrate increasingly into the global Empire, developing its competitiveness in the market and adopting the "democratic" paradigm indicated by the countries of the Empire, which leads to perpetual slavery. The other is to adopt a strategy whereby they place value on their worth but this is not an easy route. There are many contradictions to confront within African society if it opts for this route, but it is the only alternative to slavery. 

During the debate it was stated that many governments of countries in the Third World are agents of economic powers and people rely on them because it is the easy answer, since they do not have the political will to stand up to them. It is necessary to change the direction of globalization, so that it is not in the hands of some countries and of economic powers linked to them, but the harm involved does not consist in globalization per se but in the fact that through it capitalism is imposed on countries, thus continuously increasing the profits of the minority which holds the economic power. 

It was also said that the goal of globalization is to concentrate power in a few hands, but it is possible to fight against this (for example in African countries, which cannot sustain capitalist globalization) giving way to a process led by populations. 
 
 *partie=titre An International (Criminal) Court for Transnational Companies? 
Brief from the presentation made by Professor Francois Rigaux  *partie=nil 

International jurisdictions which exist are not applicable except to States which have voluntarily submitted to them (the International Court of Justice) and to some individuals who have committed particularly serious crimes, as a consequence of decisions taken by the Security Council (the Courts relating to ex-Yugoslavia, Rwanda, etc.) Transnational companies (TNCs) are economic agents of private law and are subject in principle to rule of law and to the jurisdiction of its courts. The transnational group does not, in itself, possess an identity which can be distinguished from each of the entities that make it up, so that it can only be obliged to answer for its acts in a fragmented way, so that it benefits from the opposing interests of the States in which it operates. The recent tendency to consider legal entities as criminally sanctionable has not yet shown its efficiency. 

The transfer of prohibited or regulated activities in one State to countries with less regulations allows them to escape their responsibilities. The transfer of industries or other very dangerous activities (such as in the case of Bhopal), as well as its transfer to countries with cheap labor and lower social protection levels in order to make production costs cheaper, are examples of abuses committed by TNCs. 
In principle it is not illegal to take advantage of the disparities between States nor of the differences caused by the unequal development between different countries. However, the policies applied by TNCs through institutions such as the IMF and the WB, which led to poor countries becoming indebted and later to the imposition upon them of International jurisdictions which exist are not applicable except to States which have voluntarily submitted to them (the International Court of Justice) and to some individuals who have committed particularly serious crimes, as a consequence of decisions taken by the Security Council (the Courts relating to ex-Yugoslavia, Rwanda, etc.) Transnational companies (TNCs) are economic agents of private law and are subject in principle to rule of law and to the jurisdiction of its courts. The transnational group does not, in itself, possess an identity which can be distinguished from each of the entities that make it up, so that it can only be obliged to answer for its acts in a fragmented way, so that it benefits from the opposing interests of the States in which it operates. The recent tendency to consider legal entities as criminally sanctionable has not yet shown its efficiency. 

The transfer of prohibited or regulated activities in one State to countries with less regulations allows them to escape their responsibilities. The transfer of industries or other very dangerous activities (such as in the case of Bhopal), as well as its transfer to countries with cheap labor and lower social protection levels in order to make production costs cheaper, are examples of abuses committed by TNCs. 

In principle it is not illegal to take advantage of the disparities between States nor of the differences caused by the unequal development between different countries. However, the policies applied by TNCs through institutions such as the IMF and the WB, which led to poor countries becoming indebted and later to the imposition upon them of structural adjustment measures which impoverished many of them even further, and their peoples. These actions are violations of fundamental human rights, such as the right to health and the right to life. 
 
 *partie=titre Criminal responsibility of transnational companies 
Brief from the presentation made by Professor David Baigún   *partie=nil 

In order to debate this issue it is necessary to establish the difference between the paradigmatic model and the real model. The first consists of the approval, by the international community, of an international convention which regulates the total activity of the TNCs in the various jurisdictional spheres involved: civil, administrative, penal, splitting up, of course, the area of rights and obligations, of consequences in terms of the infringement of duties which belong to the administrative or civil orbit of the penal sphere, insofar as criminal behavior needs to be strictly defined and to include crimes related to the social and economic order and to the environment. It is obvious that a global order requires appropriate action on the part of national States, which must accept the model adopted in the Convention into their legal structures. 

The actual model consists of the transformations which can currently be made as a response to urgent needs, offering viable proposals in the immediate term, based on the possibilities offered by legislation and their potential modifications. 

The first step is to recognize that the subject of a punishable action is a legal entity and that, as such, it is criminally liable for the crimes that it commits. Prior to this it is necessary to define the TNCs. This is indispensable in order to determine how the sanction can be carried out. Without forgetting the difference between "multinational company" and "transnational company", at present the best definition is that of C.A. Michalet of "a company or group on a large scale which, from a national base, sets up various branches in different countries with a global strategy and organization". From this definition there are other characteristics which appear: a process of concentration in the base country, the support of the State in which it originates (which is part of its strategy), actions as a group and actions of a legal form (holding) which is used as a model. However, this model is restricted today, because there exist many groups which have more than one platform of support, so one has to talk of one or more national bases. 

Despite the variety of operations and mechanisms, the TNCs use similar normative apparatus. Both the "holding" company and the branches are legal entities subject to the regulations of the different countries in which they operate and which, as a consequence, we must keep in mind the traditional legal indicators of national scope. Thus, the domicile of a "holding" company is a decisive characteristic, though it does not always reflect the real importance of the managing body within the network, the origin of capital or the nationality of persons which run it. The legal regulation of TNCs does not reflect the real process of the company. The normative apparatus is not sufficient to identify the center of strategic decisions, which are determined by other components, nor do they reveal the control of management of finances, technology or even the administrative apparatus, which manages the ANG-Part-II 10 networks according to a hierarchical structure in which there is flowing communication between the center and the periphery. 

The synchronicity between the processes of reality and the legal form is relevant in a system of civil and commercial law, however it is also in criminal law, where the system for indicting is based on an institutional notion: a formally constituted company. In these cases, the company is the subject of the action and it is the company which is assigned responsibility and sanctions for committing the crime. The acceptance of criminal liability by legal entities is linked to the liability of large corporations in cases of violation of human rights, which is demonstrated in armed conflicts and in the so-called  situations of social risk or damage. In the first case the role of TNCs in the manufacturing and marketing of weapons of war and of toxic chemical products used in internal and international armed conflicts is well known. 

There has been no empirical research carried out on the quantitative scope of the participation of corporations and it is a truth stated by Pero Grullo when he notes that the density of economic interests conspires against any attempt at quantitative or qualitative research in such a domain. Better known is the link between the manufacturing and marketing of arms and belligerent activity of States (see the data given by E.P. Thomson in his book on the war of the galaxies, in which names of beneficiaries of state budgets are given, those same which are members of committees appointed by the government to prepare the plans and to reprogram activities, obviously in accordance with the central objectives of the policy of the United States). 

Along with subcontracting companies which provide arms there are other pacts drawn up with subcontractors, huge investments are made in some technical models, new models of greater destructive power are tested, all of which are linked to the budgets of States. Not only companies which manufacture arms are involved, but also chemical industries and the damage caused to the environment by the use of such arms does not require further explanation (the use of depleted uranium generates a great increase in atmospheric radiation levels, producing thus a high level of risk for the environment as a whole and for the health of present and future populations). The sophistication of the means of destruction used indicates the participation of companies which possess sophisticated technology. The participation of corporations in crimes described under article 5 of the Statutes of Rome includes the actions of legal entities in fraud committed by the distribution of food to the population, in the handling of state subsidies intended for displaced persons and refugees, abuses of tax exemptions which were intended for companies to contribute to humanitarian activities. 

The second area is where there are situations of risk or of social damage. The TNCs also affect cultural, economic and social rights in contexts of unarmed violence, for example, in situations defined under article II, par. c of the Convention for the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, where it defines one of the modalities of genocide as: the intentional subjection of the group to living conditions which will lead to their physical destruction, whether this be total or partial. This provision does not require armed violence to be used for there to be genocide  ­ it is enough that objective conditions which are potentially able to cause destruction have been created intentionally. The Transnational can become an active subject of this conduct, and this is what happens in reality. The result harms the previously mentioned legal assets: the social and economic order and the environment. 

The system of criminal responsibility of legal entities should also be accompanied by individual criminal responsibility. There is a first model which is consistent with making the legal entity responsible in the person of its executive agents. In reality this model does not take into account the legal entity but instead the individuals (traditional model). A second ANG-Part-II 11 model makes the legal entity at the head of an executive responsible, which has the disadvantage of punishing individuals who did not participate in the decision which produced the damage or who opposed the criminal act. A third model is dual indictment: making the legal person and the individuals responsible which, within it, took the decision to carry out the criminal act. 

The application of the model of dual indictment requires modifying some traditional precepts of the criminal code which are not able to deal with situations relating to legal entities. It is not because the traditional criminal code is based on liability of individuals and in the case of legal entities the action is carried out by individuals, it is because they are qualitatively distinctive cases, since we are speaking of a product with various components: (a) it is a product because it is the result of a decision which is independent from individual intentions or sentiments; (b) the organization sometimes decisions are made through various fora of the organization, but as far as the law is concerned it is the result which counts, the institutional decision; (c) the interest or economic benefit, which is what determines the criminal activity, benefits the legal entity (the TNC). 

In the same way as the traditional criminal code, actions disapproved socially can be destined to bring about a situation or process (result). The institutional decision of the Transnational aims at a goal through an activity. It is similar to crimes causing injury through their commission, which could be identified in terms of legal entities as "willful commission of socially injurious acts" although obviously it is not the same injury as caused by an individual's actions. 

It is possible that the institutional act may be negligent, indifferent given some orders regarding precautions to be taken: in this case the picture is similar to those crimes known as "culpable crimes". Crimes of omission also fall within this schema (non-compliance with required behaviour). The causes for viable justification are, for example, a state of necessity. 

A TNC can commit a crime of "pollution" or of monopoly, perfectly described (in law), but in order to demonstrate that he is not responsible must prove a state of necessity and the elements that the judge will take into consideration cannot be "subjective", only those which are "objective". 

In the system of liability of legal entities one cannot speak of guilt, only of social responsibility, which can mean that the company, despite other behavior being required of it, gives priority to its own profits and decides and carries out the activity, accepting the possibility that this might create a risk or cause damage. Alternative behavior is required of the company but it ignores this. As far as responsibility is concerned, one would have to determine if the action benefited the company or one of its members. 

In terms of punishment these can range from fines to the cancellation of some of its activities, rendering it unable to function or its dissolve. In terms of security measures there can be jurisdictional control which can be determined by the judge (an intervenor, accounting measures, etc.) to closely supervise the activities of the company. 
 
 *partie=titre International labor norms and codes of conduct for TNCs 
Brief from the presentation made by Mr. Claude K. Akpokavi  *partie=nil
 
International labor norms take on great importance in this period of globalization or internationalization, which is nothing other than the internationalization of capital, a process which has been taking place since the end of the Cold War on the basis of a hegemonic model according to which the power of the State is undermined and the power of TNCs is increased. 

These companies are acting in conjunction with certain organizations such as the IMF and the WB. TNCs have a scope which cannot be defined by their capital or branches throughout the world, given that often they do not have production units (such as in the case of Nike), but instead they expand by using subcontractors which often do not realize they are working for a TNC. 

This new form of both centralization and at the same time dispersion of capital determines a process of accumulation which is without precedent and which creates difficulties for the application of labor norms, because a large part of the production is moved to different countries and the new working methods do not create nucleuses of presence in production in countries which were adapting to previous forms of organization of workers. This represents a challenge for trade union organizations, which try to establish alliances and create new ways in which to organize categories of workers, such as migrants, women, the unemployed, etc.. 

The trade unions also fight for international labor norms to be respected and try to develop norms to regulate international capital, that is, to regulate TNCs. The ILO Conventions, such as freedom of association, non discrimination at work, child labor, etc., are very important and are a significant point of reference in a process of globalization because TNCs which have committed many crimes in the so-called countries of the South and have a shameful past, are judged by public opinion. This is why they try to preserve a clean image in the eyes of consumers showing that they respect the environment and international labou norms, especially those which are compulsory. There are also Codes of Conduct, with standards which are lower than those in the labor norms. 

In 1998 the ILO carried out a study on Codes of Conduct of TNCs and noted that only in 15% of them were there references to freedom of association allowed, in only 25% references to forced labor, in 40% the salary level, in 45% child labor, in 66% non discrimination and in 75% references to health and safety at work. In general, the Codes are very selective in terms of international labor norms. The World Bank, for example, prohibits forced child labor, but it does not accept the principles of freedom of association and is wary of trade unions, which can distort the market. 

It is not acceptable that Codes of Conduct be optional and not mandatory. Furthermore they cannot replace national legislation or international norms. In reality they have the effect of improving the image of companies without creating obligations for them. It is necessary to have it established that such Codes of Conduct must be obligatory and there should be sanctions when they are not implemented. They should also include in their applicability not only the companies but also all subcontractors, through agreements which create obligations between companies and their service providers. It is not valid to state that companies cannot control their subcontractors, because if they can do it with regard to the goods they receive then they can also do so with regard to social aspects. 

Furthermore TNCs do not respect their own Codes of Conduct. In the case of Adidas, their publicity referred to a socially responsible company, however, they systematically violate human rights and labor rights, including those of their Code of Conduct. However, it is very difficult to impose their follow-up as they are not compulsory and because even the trade union media are not in agreement on this point. As far as the Declaration on TNCs of the ILO is concerned, the fact that it is not a compulsory instrument makes it difficult for it to have an effect when a company is denounced and they are not identified by their names even in reports for the follow-up of the Declaration. 

There is a tendency to privatize human rights: there are consultants for human rights who work in some companies and even Amnesty International has accepted acts from Shell, that from the point of view of human rights are unacceptable. Codes of Conduct are a proof of this privatization. The United Nations have subscribed to this tendency by participating in the Global Compact. 

The function that States organizations such as the UN and the ILO should play has  changed, because they do not act in a States system. The challenge is to construct a system which reflects the new reality and fulfils a function which is more active within it. In designing new systems the right to development must be taken into account and the interests of developing countries, just the opposite of what countries such as the United States are doing, which defend only their own interests and that of their companies. In the case of South Africa, where 39 TNCs took the government to court for promulgating a law allowing the production of AIDS drugs at a low price, it was international public opinion, as much in the North as in the South which compelled these companies to change their minds. This is a demonstration that there are means to fight against the policies imposed by TNCs, because they depend on consumers and cannot ignore their brand image, which influences their stock exchange prices. Vigilance networks need to be set up, in order to undermine the security of these companies. 

The interventions of Mr. Picard and Mr. Akpokavi were debated together. 
With regard to the issue of international organizations and their role, it was stated that international financial organizations such as the IMF and the WB seem to be imposing their law on other organizations of the system of the UN and gave the impression of using the UN as a mere screen, to the point of not accepting the ILO as a speaker in terms of economic questions related to the international conventions and the rights of workers. The image of the international organizations seems to be inconsistent. It was pointed out that the IMF and the WB do not belong, or act as if they do not belong, to the UN system, despite the resolution of the General Assembly of 1947 through which the status of specialized organizations within the system was conferred upon them. The ILO held conversations with the IMF on questions such as child labor, poverty and the constant increase of this, trying to associate it to the promotion of fundamental rights. Yet neither the IMF nor the WB have ever accepted the Conventions on freedom of association nor on collective bargaining and the impression exists that these organizations just use the ILO to give a social guarantee of respectability to their policies. For example in Benin some 10 000 officials were dismissed from their posts and the ILO was requested to find a solution for the unemployed but they were not allowed to participate in the decision which led to their dismissal, nor were they consulted with regard to the structural adjustment plan implemented in that country. The fact that there were conversations on some specific aspects does not mean that there are common policies between the ILO and the financial organizations. 

It was also stated that these financial organizations get involved and support sectors which do not fall under their jurisdiction, such as the social security sector and labor legislation. In several countries in Africa they have obliged governments  to modify their labor codes, on the pretext that they were too inflexible. They claim to get involved in everything and have everyone obey them and, in reality they are doing so. Both in terms of social policy as well as environmental issues they are the ones dictating policy. 

It was noted that these organizations are all composed of States so that they are the ones determining policy and they seem to act in a schizophrenic manner, because they have different positions depending on the organization in which they are participating. It is States with economic and financial power who confer on the organizations their power, giving the  WB an enormous budget to carry out projects such as the Amazon project, where slave labor and child labor abounded, while in practice they reduce the budget of the ILO, which is decidedly slim. The States are not in principle obliged to accept the impositions of these organizations and can negotiate but their financial power is such that the least developed countries are very weak with regard to them and their room for maneouvre is very tight, so that they cannot usually refuse the policies of these organizations and it is in these States where the worst consequences of these policies can be felt. In reality there is a shared responsibility, because the governing élite of the least developed countries often benefit (through corruption, etc.) without forgetting the danger of military interventions in countries which do not accept the rules of the game imposed on them by the large economic powers. 

The issue of Codes of Conduct for TNCs was debated at length. The participants asked themselves questions concerning the alleged compulsory nature of the voluntary Codes of Conduct. Once a company had a Code of Conduct was it possible to demand in law the fulfillment of the conduct indicated in the Code? Could judges take the code into consideration when considering whether a company had behaved improperly or in criminal manner? In the affirmative case, it was said that they could prove useful. However, although some thought that despite being voluntary they did in the end oblige the company in terms of public opinion, it was demonstrated that companies did not respect them, and no-one could call them to account on that fact. Furthermore, such codes established labor norms of a lower level than those of the ILO Conventions, so that they should not be accepted as valid, since they are a way of reducing the social obligations of companies. They are all, in general, unsatisfactory and furthermore companies do not implement them or use them improperly, and where this is the case, according to Delmas-Marty, this gives rise to unfair competition. 

The companies bring economic pressure to bear to avoid being criticized for non-fulfillment, as was the case with NIKE, where it withdrew the funds it had contributed to the University of Oregon when this last joined the Workers' Rights Consortium. 

It was also believed that the Codes of Conduct are linked to the notion of "corporate governance" which, in the years 1980-1985 meant, a certain transparency and legitimacy in business. But subsequent evolution has demonstrated that it is very dangerous to allow companies to dictate their own rules without any kind of State control, for example through the creation of registers. In Switzerland a certain consistency has been achieved by supplementing voluntary provisions with compulsory ones. This would be a form of modern corporativism.  

It's time to stop corporate globalization and to fight for another world we know is possible. In November 1999, the World Trade Organization's (WTO) Third Ministerial Meeting in Seattle collapsed in spectacular fashion, in the face of unprecedented protest from people and governments around the world. Since then around the world in rich and poor nations alike, millions of people have joined the fight for a just and sustainable future and against corporate globalization.  

Despite the promises to improve the system made at the end of the Seattle ministerial aimed at countering the WTO's crisis of legitimacy, no improvements have taken place and instead things have gotten worse. The time is overdue to roll back the power and authority of the WTO. The democratic, transparency and accountability deficits in this institution, which supposedly promotes free trade, have in fact only contributed to the concentration of wealth in the hands of the rich few, growing inequality within and between nations, increasing poverty for the majority of the world's peoples, displacement of farmers and workers especially in third world countries, and unsustainable patterns of production and consumption. 

The protestations of workers and farmers, human rights and environmental activists, religious and indigenous leaders worldwide and of third world governments regarding imbalances and problems in implementation of the GATT Uruguay Round Agreements are being swept aside. The WTO's allegedly neutral Secretariat, a group of mainly wealthy governments and the corporate lobbies are struggling to put the WTO back to business as usual - expanding corporate globalization. The built-in review negotiations of the WTO Agreements on Agriculture, Services and Trade-related Intellectual Property Rights have been steered away from review and repair, towards further ravage and ruin. 

Governments are being bamboozled and blackmailed to accept a new round of WTO-expanding negotiations at the Fourth Ministerial Meeting to be held in Qatar on 9-13 November. Seductively nicknamed the "development round", the real agenda for a new round is to expand the scope of corporate access and privileges under the WTO regime to investment, government procurement, competition policy, and more. 

Such further benefits to transnational corporations will further put at risk national and local economies; workers, farmers, indigenous peoples, women and other social groups; health and safety, the environment, and animal welfare. All this is taking place in the context of increasing global instability, the collapse of national economies, growing inequity both between and within nations and increasing environmental and social degradation, as a result of the acceleration of the process of corporate globalization. 

The time has come to acknowledge the crises of the international trading system and its main administering institution, the WTO. It is time to stop the new round and turn trade around to serve the interest of all. We need to replace this old, unfair and oppressive trade system with a new, socially just and sustainable trading framework for the 21st Century. 

Our World is not for sale. WTO Shrink or Sink is an international sign-on letter. Organizations can endorse it. 
 
*{ Please visit www.canadians.org 
 
Direct link http://www.canadians.org/campaigns/campaigns-tradenotforsale.html }

We need to protect cultural, biological, economic and social diversity; introduce progressive policies to prioritize local economies and trade; secure internationally recognized economic, cultural, social and labor rights; and claim the sovereignty of peoples and national and sub national democratic decision making processes. In order to do this, we need new rules based on the principles of democratic control of resources, ecological sustainability, equity, cooperation and precaution.  

In light of the above, we make the following demands of our governments:  
No WTO Expansion  

We reiterate our opposition to continued attempts to launch a new round or expand the WTO by bringing in new issues such as investment, competition, government procurement, biotechnology or by accelerated tariff liberalization. Expanding the WTO into issues such as investment and competition policy or requiring all countries to adhere to WTO government procurement rules (starting with an initial phase of transparency rules), would threaten national self determination and the survival of small and medium sized local firms and farms, remove support for local economies, and cause immeasurable social and environmental damage. We also reject the new tactics of the European Union in particular to sneak in investment and competition negotiations by introducing them as plurilateral agreements. There must be a moratorium on further trade liberalization initiatives at the WTO. Instead, the issues of inequity - implementation issues - for developing countries must be urgently addressed. These should not be linked up in the context of further liberalization negotiations. 

 *partie=titre WTO Hands Off: Protect Basic Social Rights and environmental sustainability  *partie=nil 
 
It is inappropriate and unacceptable for social rights and basic needs to be constrained or over-ridden by WTO rules. Protections critical to human or planetary welfare, such as food and water, basic social services, education, health and safety, environmental sustainability and animal well-being must not be undercut by commercial agreements. Inappropriate encroachment by trade rules in such areas has already resulted in citizen campaigns on genetically modified organisms, old growth forests, domestically prohibited goods and predatory tobacco marketing.  

 *partie=titre Gut GATS: Protect  Basic Social Services AND PUBLIC PROTECTIONS   *partie=nil 
 
Areas such as health, education, energy distribution, water, and other basic human services must not be subject to international free trade rules. In addition, the GATS must not limit  the ability of governments and people to regulate in order to protect the environment, health, safety and other public interests. In the WTO General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), the principle of "progressive liberalization" and the implications of foreign investment in service sectors has already led to severe problems such as deregulation of essential services.  

Stop Corporate Patent Protectionism -  Seeds & Medicine are Human Needs, not Commodities:  
All intellectual property policies must allow governments to limit patent protection in order to protect public health and safety, especially patents on life-saving medicines and life forms. The patenting of life forms including microorganisms must be prohibited in all national and international regimes. Current intellectual property rules in trade pacts, such as the WTO TRIPs agreement, obstruct consumer access to essential medicines and other goods, lead to private appropriation of life forms and traditional knowledge, undermine biodiversity, and keep poorer countries from increasing their levels of social and economic welfare. There is no basis for inclusion of such intellectual property claims in a trade agreement. 

 *partie=titre No Patents on Life   *partie=nil 
 
The patenting of life forms and other intellectual property rights over biological resources must be prohibited in all national and international regimes. Genetic diversity is not a category of private property and biopiracy or theft of traditional knowledge must be stopped. 

 *partie=titre Food is a Basic Human Right: Stop the Agriculture Agreement Fraud and Calamity  *partie=nil 
The Agreement on Agriculture is fraudulent because the subsidies going to export oriented industrial farming have not been reduced (but instead gone up), whereas the small farmers are suffering from import liberalization wiping out their livelihoods and incomes. To avoid further calamities to millions of small farmers, action must be taken immediately to drastically reduce or remove support for export oriented agriculture and to reverse import liberalization. 

Measures taken to promote and protect genuine food sovereignty and security as well as to promote small farmers practicing sustainable agriculture must be exempted from international trade rules. The trading system must not undermine the livelihood of peasants, small farmers, artisanal fishers and indigenous peoples. 

The basic human right to food can only be realized in a system where food sovereignty is guaranteed, meaning the right of peoples to define their own food and agricultural policies as well as the right to produce their basic foods in a manner respecting cultural and productive diversity.  

 *partie=titre No Investment Liberalization   *partie=nil 

The WTO Trade Related Investment Measures (TRIMS) Agreement must be eliminated. All countries and especially third world countries must have the right to use policy options (such as local content policy) to increase the capacity of their own productive sectors, especially small and medium enterprises. Obviously, the TRIMS review must not be used to extend the investment issue in WTO. We therefore reiterate our strongest opposition to attempts to start negotiations on investment rules, or an investment framework or an investment agreement of whatever kind in the WTO. The proposals for a GATS-type approach, or an initial transparency agreement on investment, or a plurilateral agreement, are only changes in tactics aimed at drawing in countries or groups that have refused to support a more extreme investment agreement. The objective of giving unprecedented rights to foreign investors remains the same, and we reject all these seemingly watered-down approaches which have the same ultimate goal as the discredited MAI. 

 *partie=titre Fair Trade: Special and Differential Treatment   *partie=nil 
Special and differential rights for third world countries must be recognized, expanded, and operationalized in the world trading system. This is to take into account the weak position of third world countries in the international trading system. Without the enforcement of special and differential rights, there can be no possibility of third world countries benefiting from world trade.  

 *partie=titre Prioritize Social Rights and the Environment   *partie=nil 

"Free trade" puts corporate profits before people and the environment. We need fair trade. Fundamental human and workers' rights must be respected, promoted and realized, as must the environment, health, education, indigenous peoples' rights, development, safety, food security, and animal welfare. 

For example the ILO Declaration on Fundamental Principles and Rights at Work, the Convention on Biodiversity and its Biosafety Protocol and the UN Declaration on Human Rights must be actively realized. The WTO must not undermine such genuine international social and environmental agreements. 

The importance of promoting, respecting and realizing fundamental worker rights and other human rights by all relevant means includes action at the appropriate international institutions. 

 *partie=titre Democratize Decision-Making   *partie=nil 
 
People must have the right to self-determination and the right to know and decide on international commercial commitments. Among other things, this requires that decision-making processes in negotiations and enforcement at international commercial bodies be democratic, transparent and inclusive. The WTO operates in a secretive, exclusionary manner that shuts out WTO Members and the public. It is dominated by a few powerful governments acting on behalf of their corporate elite.  

 *partie=titre Dispute the System   *partie=nil 
 
The WTO dispute settlement system is unacceptable in so far as it enforces an illegitimate system of unfair rules and operates with undemocratic procedures and also usurps the rulemaking and legislative role of nations and local governments.  

A socially just international trade system will also require change outside the WTO. A socially just international trade system must take prior account of the rights and welfare of the workers and farmers who produce and provide the commodities and services. All governments and all international agencies must address the attacks by multinational corporations and governments on basic workers rights; the reversal of the gains of workers' struggles; the undermining of job security; and the race-to-thebottom in wages. Workers rights must be strengthened worldwide.  

Also, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, and the regional development banks must write off 100% of the debts owed to them by poor countries so the countries can reallocate these funds and use for example for poverty eradication and development. The use of structural adjustment conditionality to force trade liberalization in third world countries and elsewhere must be stopped. Governments must negotiate, through the UN system or other appropriate bodies, with full democratic participation, a binding agreement to ensure that corporate conduct is socially and environmentally responsible and democratically accountable.  

 *partie=titre Conclusions and Consequences   *partie=nil 
 
We are committed to a sustainable, socially just and democratically accountable trade system. Thus, as a first step, we demand that our governments implement the changes listed in this  document in order to roll back the power and authority of the WTO and turn trade around. 

We commit ourselves to mobilize people within our countries to fight for these demands and to defy the unjust policies of the WTO. We will also support other people and countries who do so with international solidarity campaigns.  We pledge to carry the Spirit of Seattle around the world and ensure that no new WTO round is launched in Qatar.