TWN Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Aug20/04)
5 August 2020
Third World Network

Tenures of DDGs extended until new DG is selected
Published in SUNS #9173 dated 5 August 2020

Geneva, 4 Aug (D. Ravi Kanth) – The chair of the WTO General Council (GC), Ambassador David Walker from New Zealand, has announced that the tenures of the four incumbent deputy directors-general (DDGs) will be extended for a period of almost three months during the absence of a Director-General (DG) from 1 September.

Significantly, the four DDGs – Mr Alan Wolff from the United States, Mr Karl Brauner from Germany, Mr Yonov Frederick Agah from Nigeria and Mr Yi Xiaozhun from China – will continue with their respective functions, including in the areas of negotiations that fall under their remit.

But the four DDGs are required to maintain close contact with the GC chair, who will be representing the 164 members at the WTO.

At the regular General Council meeting conducted in a hybrid (in person and virtual) format on 31 July, the GC chair Ambassador Walker admitted that there was no consensus among members on finalizing one of the four DDGs to be designated as an acting DG.

Several criteria were adopted during the consultations to arrive at consensus but these criteria remained inconsistent with the Marrakesh Agreement and the GC decision of 10 December 2002 on the appointment of a DG, he suggested.

Therefore, the best solution is to let all the four DDGs to remain in office to carry out their regular and respective functions in close consultations/coordination with the GC chair, who represents the interests of the members, Ambassador Walker suggested, according to people who spoke to the SUNS on the condition of anonymity.

Effectively, the GC chair’s pronouncements could be interpreted as his role being one of de facto acting DG working closely with the DDGs, suggested a trade envoy, who asked not to be quoted.

With the outgoing DG Roberto Azevedo stepping down from office on 31 August, there is going to be a period of three months of the final phase of the DG selection process, beginning from 1 September.

During these three months, an acting DG is required to be appointed by the General Council to carry out the regular functions of the WTO, as per paragraph 23 of the GC decision of 10 December 2002.

Paragraph 23 of the GC decision (WT/L/509) states: “In the event of a vacancy in the post of Director-General, the General Council shall designate one of the existing Deputy Directors-General to serve as Acting Director-General until the appointment of a new Director-General. The Chair of the General Council shall initiate, as soon as possible, a process for appointment of a new Director-General, in keeping with the procedures set out herein, and may establish expedited deadlines as necessary in consultation with Members.”

Asked about the GC chair apparently functioning as de facto acting DG, the WTO spokesperson Keith Rockwell said that would not be the case as the four DDGs will carry out their regular work and only when any guidance is required will they consult with the GC chair, which happens even in normal times.

At the GC meeting, Ambassador Walker said repeatedly that he is guided by the best interests of the Organization, “dignity, respect, transparency and inclusivity” as the basis for the solution in these current exceptional circumstances of limited time.

“We proceed according to the understanding” which has common elements that would apply for the period starting from 1 September until November, when a new DG will be appointed, Ambassador Walker suggested.

According to this understanding, there are no structural changes being made in the functioning of the Secretariat, he said.

The GC chair held a virtual meeting with various regional coordinators on 30 July, regarding the designation of the acting DG.

Apparently, the GC chair informed that four names (of the DDGs) were mentioned by members for potential acting DG.

But two names (Mr Alan Wolff and Mr Karl Brauner) out of these four were most commonly mentioned by members, he told the regional coordinators.

He also informed that a possibility of rotating between the two or four DDGs had been mentioned by members, suggesting that there was no consensus.

The coordinators of the developed countries still have different positions: while the US prefers Alan Wolff and is open to rotation among two most commonly expressed DDGs, the EU wishes to designate Karl Brauner as acting DG and supports rotation among the four DDGs if there is a rotation, said a participant who was present at the meeting.

Significantly, the GRULAC (Group of Latin American and Caribbean countries) coordinator stressed that the majority of the group members had expressed readiness to join any consensus to be reached, the participant said, adding that one GRULAC country flatly opposed Mr Alan Wolff.

The African Group was neutral and expressed the view that it can support any consensus reached by other regional groups.

The GC chair also announced the modalities for the final phase of the selection process beginning on 7 September.

The process will be carried out in three rounds of members expressing their preferences during which three candidates will be removed from the eight candidates in the first round, three candidates will be removed from the remaining five candidates in the second round, and two will remain in the final round, he suggested.

In the first round, members will be asked to express four preferences, two preferences in the second round, leaving two candidates in the final round.

The eight candidates in the DG race are Dr Jesus Seade Kuri from Mexico, Dr Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala from Nigeria, Mr Abdulhameed Mamdouh from Egypt, Mr Tudor Ulianovschi from Moldova, Ms Yoo Myung-hee from South Korea, Ms Amina C Mohamed from Kenya, Mr Mohammad Maziad Al-Tuwaijri from Saudi Arabia and Dr Liam Fox from the United Kingdom.

Ambassador Walker said that he will be guided by the two facilitators – the chair of the Dispute Settlement Body Ambassador Dacio Castillo from Honduras and the chair of the Trade Policy Review Body Ambassador Harald Aspelund from Iceland.

The GC chair emphasized that he will adopt strict confidentiality procedures during the three phases of the selection process, underlining that he will neither inform the candidates, nor the members about the number of preferences expressed in each round.

After each round, members will be informed about the candidates that will be asked to step down from the contest based on the criteria of selection.

He said the procedures are largely based on the 2013 GC decision (see SUNS #9170 dated 29 July 2020).

In a restricted document (Job/GC/243), the GC chair made it clear that, “as in the past, the positions and views expressed by Members will be treated in the strictest confidence by us, with no information or other forms of indications of individual Members’ specific preferences made available by us to other Members, to the candidates or to the public.”

The selection process reinforces the opacity of choosing the new director-general, said a participant, who asked not to be quoted.

MODALITIES ON APPOINTMENT OF DG

The modalities for Phase 3 of the process of appointment of the next DG are highlighted in the statement by the GC Chair, Ambassador Walker, at the Heads of Delegation meeting on 31 July:

“1. As indicated in the convening notice and further to the useful discussion that we had at the Informal HoDs Meeting on Tuesday, the purpose of this meeting today is to announce the modalities for the Phase 3 of the DG Appointment Process which, as you know, will start on 7 September. In this Phase and in accordance with the Procedures in WT/L/509, I will be assisted by the Chairs of the Dispute Settlement Body and the Trade Policy Review Body acting as Facilitators – respectively, Ambassador Castillo of Honduras and Ambassador Aspelund of Iceland. I greatly appreciate and look forward to their assistance in this process.

2. On the basis of the discussion last Tuesday, and having listened carefully to the views expressed, Phase 3 will proceed on the basis of the following modalities:

* First, we will hold three rounds of consultations, with two candidates in the third and final round, in order to facilitate the building of consensus.

* Second, three candidates will be expected to withdraw after the first round; and three candidates will be expected to withdraw after the second round. So, the profile will be 8-5-2. This means we start with 8 candidates in the first round; then narrow the field to 5 candidates in the second round; and 2 in the third and final round.

* Third, on the basis of past practice, and keeping in mind that this is a consensus-building exercise, the Facilitators and I will ask the same question as in the past, that is: “What are your preferences?” – this means more than one, that is multiple, preferences in no order, i.e. without ranking. As in the past, we will not accept any negative preferences.

* We will ask delegations to come forward with a maximum of four preferences in the first round of consultations and a maximum of two preferences in the second round, with delegations urged to provide the full number of preferences in each case.

* Let me stress again that the aim of this exercise is to identify “the candidate or candidates least likely to attract consensus,” thereby allowing Members to arrive at a final decision. The objective is to identify, among the different preferences expressed by Delegations, those least likely to attract consensus, so that the General Council can narrow the field of candidates, as foreseen in the Procedures.

* Fourth, we will be consulting Heads of Delegations in their capacity as representatives of individual Members, and the consultations will be on a “confessional” basis. As in the past, the positions and views expressed by Members will be treated in the strictest confidence by us, with no information or other forms of indications of individual Members’ specific preferences made available by us to other Members, to the candidates or to the public.

* Fifth, in assessing the information we receive and reporting to Members, we shall be guided by the elements set out in paragraph 17 of the 2002 Procedures, which states: “The Chair, with the assistance of the facilitators, shall consult all Members, including non-resident Members, in order to assess their preferences and the breadth of support for each candidate”.

And with respect to the breadth of support, I recall that this concept was discussed and clarified during the previous appointment processes – that is the one that took place in 2005, and then confirmed in 2013. In particular, in 2005, the then General Council Chair explained that: “As regards the breadth of support, we considered the distribution of preferences across geographic regions and among the categories of Members generally recognized in WTO provisions: that is, LDCs, developing countries and developed countries”. In 2005, the Chair also informed that other criteria were considered and rejected by Members in the formulation of the Procedures in 2002. Therefore, the Chair explained that “as reflected in past decisions and in experience, and based on common sense, “breadth of support” means the larger membership.” This was also the approach followed in 2013.

* And finally, after each round of consultations, and in line with paragraph 18 of the Procedures, we will be reporting the outcome of the first round of consultations to all Members at an open-ended meeting of Heads of Delegation to be held as soon as possible following the conclusion of the first round of consultations.

* In respecting the dignity of the candidates and the Members nominating them, the eight Members who nominated candidates will be informed of the outcome immediately after each round and before the rest of the membership – as was also done in the past.

3. The first round of consultations will begin on Monday 7 September. The Facilitators and I will aim at finishing the first round in 6 working days, as was done in the past. This means that we will aim at finishing this round on 16 September, taking into account the period of the Jeune Genevois. We will then convene an Informal Heads of Delegation meeting as soon as possible to report on the outcome of the consultations to all Members – after having informed the Members who nominated candidates. We will aim at maintaining a similar schedule for the second and third rounds too, to the extent possible. We will send out a communication later today inviting all Members to consult with us in the first round. I urge you all to come forward and schedule appointments.

4. Once again, let me stress a couple of additional key elements. The decision to appoint the new Director-General is for you, the Members, to make. The task of the Chair and the Facilitators is to support you in this process, facilitate the building of consensus, and assist you in moving from the initial field of candidates to a final decision on appointment. You can count on us to carry out this task with objectivity and impartiality. We are very mindful of the importance of this task and of the trust that you, the Members, have placed in us. Rest assured that we take this most seriously. We will act at all times strictly within the agreed Procedures.

5. And in line with paragraph 1 of the Procedures, we need to keep in mind at all times that this process has to be guided by the best interests of the Organization, respect for the dignity of the candidates and the Members nominating them, and by full transparency and inclusiveness at all stages.”