Czech Yearbook Vol. 4 2013

266 / 350

BREGT NATENS – JAN WOUTERS CYIL 4 ȍ2013Ȏ
government procurement of services. The negotiation mandate on subsidies requires
such disciplines to be multilateral. Nonetheless, it has been noted that there would be
no ‘insurmountable technical problems’ to a plurilateral approach.96 However, there
are no indications that Members are considering a plurilateral agreement on subsidies
in services. Concerning the bi- and plurilateral negotiations which aim to improve
the scheduled commitments, the possibilities for plurilateral agreements are clear:
the work of the Friends Groups may easily be the basis of such agreements. Still, in
the case of schedules, freeriding may prove to be an unsurpassable issue. Hence, for
certain sectors or issues, plurilateral options of which benefits are not extended on an
MFN basis may prove more appropriate. A similar issue may arise in the negotiations
on electronic commerce as Members appear to be focused on addressing the issue
through the schedules. As stated, securing a critical mass may overcome these issues.
6. Concluding remarks
So far, the plurilateral approach has been successful in the case of the revised GPA
and of the ITA.97 In the specific services context, the Understanding on Financial
Services and the Reference Paper on Basic Telecommunications have proven to be
effective.98 These examples may indicate that there is some willingness to go forward
in this sense. When asked about his views on the future of the WTO, the new
Director-General Roberto Azevêdo, stressed that the ‘increase in participation in
the ITA is proof that such agreements can work as true “building blocks” in the
effort to increase liberalisation at the multilateral level’, although, as noted, not all
issues can be satisfactorily addressed in this way.99 Azevêdo adds three conditions for
this: they should not be discriminatory; they should be open to participation to all
Members; and they should be sufficiently transparent to enable Members to assess the
benefits of joining the agreements. A fourth condition could be added: in order to not
jeopardise the ‘multilateralising’ of plurilateral agreements, they should not deviate too
much from the existing architecture and concepts of their corresponding multilateral
framework.100 In the end, the multilateral system must also prove to be more attractive
96 ibid.
97 The GPA is currently signed by 15 Members, including the EU, the United States and Japan. There
are 26 Members who have the status of observing Member, and 10 of those are negotiating accession.
At its conclusion, the ITA was signed by 29 Members. At present, 70 Members have.
98 The Understanding has been incorporated into the schedules of almost 40 Members. The Reference
Paper has been taken up in almost its entirety by 64 Members.
99 ICTSD, ‘Global Challenges and the Future of the WTO: Views from the Candidates Beyond the
Hype of the DG Race: Roberto Azevêdo’ (2013) <
roberto-azevedo/>.
100 INTA refers to this possibility in the Draft Resolution on TISA, which states that ‘to keep open
the possibility of „multilateralising“ the future TISA, its design should follow the GATS format
and architecture’. European Parliament, ‘Motion for a Resolution on Opening the Negotiations on
a Plurilateral Agreement on Services’, B7-/2013, 4 April 2013, 8 & 14.