|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on WTO and Trade Issues (Nov24/04) Geneva, 4 Nov (D. Ravi Kanth) — Several developments as well as the outcome of the elections in the United States on 5 November could decide the next Director-General of the World Trade Organization, including the fate of the incumbent DG, Ms Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala, said several members who asked not to be quoted. Following the seemingly dubious process adopted by the chair of the WTO’s General Council (GC), Ambassador Petter Olberg of Norway, who advanced the appointment process of the next DG on the basis of “convergence” rather than “consensus”, another person could head the trade body should ex-President Donald Trump re-capture the White House and signal to the current administration that their views on who should be the next DG should be taken into account. The GC chair allegedly broke the WTO rules by ignoring paragraph 7 of the Procedures for the Appointment of Directors-General (WT/L/509) adopted by the General Council in December 2002, which makes it clear that the DG selection process should commence 9 months before the expiry of the incumbent’s term of office. Since Ms Okonjo-Iweala’s term of office ends on 31 August 2025, the process should legally commence on 1 December 2024. In allegedly ignoring the explicit language outlined in paragraph 7 of document WT/L/509, Ambassador Olberg apparently bypassed the General Council and initiated the DG selection process on 8 October, giving countries up until 8 November to nominate candidates, on the basis of the detection of a “possible convergence”, instead of “consensus” among the WTO members, as mandated by the WTO rules and practice. The principle of consensus-based decision-making is clearly outlined in Article IX of the Marrakesh Agreement that established the WTO in 1995, following eight years of trade negotiations under the Uruguay Round. When asked whether the United States gave its approval to the GC chair’s decision to start the DG selection process based solely on the notion of “convergence”, a spokesperson for the Office of the United States Trade Representative (USTR) had told this writer that “this action was taken based on the Chair’s assumption of convergence, rather than consensus.” Later, the WTO members had expected that the US would speak its mind to stop this allegedly illegitimate process. Instead, at a crucial WTO General Council meeting on 15-16 October, the US remained silent and gave the impression that Washington was not pressing ahead with its stand as previously conveyed. It seems rather obvious that the DG and the GC chair are allegedly seeking to circumvent the rules because of the fear that former President Trump, if he regains the White House, may block the reappointment of the DG, as the previous Trump administration had blocked her original appointment, said people who asked not to be quoted. It was the Biden administration that lifted the block and allowed her appointment to go through. It appears rather ironic that the DG is allegedly seeking to circumvent the very process which enabled her to be appointed. Had the Biden administration not been given the option, she would not have become the DG, said a person, who asked not to be quoted. The GC chair and the DG have denied that the decision to bring forward the selection process is because of the possible return of President Trump to the White House. They both allege that it was started at the request of the African Group. What is interesting is that there was no formal decision by the African Group to make the request. It was made by the trade envoy of Chad who was allegedly coerced into making the request. It is noteworthy that the African Group recently rejected attempts by the DG and the chair of the Committee on Agriculture in Special Session to appoint facilitators to jumpstart the agriculture negotiations on the basis of a “possible convergence”. The Group insisted that the process should be launched only when there is consensus among the membership, prompting the question as to what has changed. The whole DG selection process appears illegitimate and should be discarded, said people, who asked not to be quoted. “The GC chair exceeded his authority and the process should be relaunched on 1 December,” said a legal analyst, who asked not to be quoted. Speculation is abound that the GC chair intends to convene a special General Council meeting and request the formal re-appointment of the Director-General, should no one else come forward to compete for the DG’s post by 8 November. +
|
||
