Peter Gallagher

India has com­plained in the recent TRIPS coun­cil that the ACTA pro­vi­sions mod­ify the bal­ance of rights and oblig­a­tions estab­lished by a mul­ti­lat­eral agree­ment (TRIPS) cov­er­ing the same domain. The secret nego­ti­a­tion of this pluri­lat­eral agree­ment by a cabal that included Aus­tralia is an attack on that bal­ance and hence on one of the pil­lars of WTO.

“Coun­tries excluded from the ACTA process have to come to rec­og­nize the seri­ous threat it rep­re­sents both sub­stan­tively as well as for the future of mul­ti­lat­eral orga­ni­za­tions. ” Extract from Michael Geist — India Comes Out Swing­ing Against ACTA at WTO

This agree­ment was not jus­ti­fied by the claims made on its behalf; the alle­ga­tions of copy­right losses were chimeras if not frauds. Join­ing the talks has been a shame­ful turn in Australia’s trade pol­icy which has, up to now, been marked by inclu­sive­ness, a respect for evi­dence in the analy­sis of pol­icy and for trans­parency in the rep­re­sen­ta­tion of com­mer­cial interests.

Pre­dictably, it seems that the pro­posed ACTA agree­ment will intro­duce new restric­tions on trade—including an oblig­a­tion to pro­vide for seizure of goods in tran­sit (i.e not in the com­merce of the coun­try autho­riz­ing the seizure) that are sus­pected of infringe­ment of a pri­vate beneift in some other coun­try. This com­mer­cial blag­guardry will fur­ther under­mine the minis­cule (pos­si­bly non-existent) pub­lic ben­e­fits of TRIPS to devel­op­ing countries.

India will not be alone in its objections.