Dr. Supachai Panichtpakdi
Director General of WTO

"Parliamentarians can help us to talk with their respective governments about how the rules could be strengthened to make them as fair as possible"

Le Director General of WTO, Dr. Supachai Panichtpakdi Photo WTO/C. Velazquez

Q: Mr. Director General, the parliamentary dimension of the WTO is gradually taking shape. What is your view of the role that MPs should ultimately play vis-à-vis the WTO both nationally and internationally?
S.P.: The international trade agreements normally have to be transformed into national norms and even if they do not become laws they have to be taken up as part of the trade rules and regulations in our countries. It is in the best interests of all participating countries that the parliamentarians have a personal knowledge of what's going in our negotiations and are able to follow them. That way they gain a fuller understanding when some of the outcomes have to be transformed into national regulations. So, in terms of national interest, I am quite certain that it is in the best interests of a country to have parliamentarians among the group of people with whom governments should be consulting as they try to structure their position for entering into negotiations.
As regards the international angle, it is also useful for parliamentarians from various parts of the world to have an opportunity, alongside dialogues with governments, to have their own dialogue with other parliamentarians. It's always important to be able to understand the legal framework and constraints that countries have and the need to base negotiating positions on this set of rules. So it certainly helps to have parliamentarians embarking upon international discussions. It's important not only in trying to come to an understanding, but also because they are able to address the shortcomings of the international rules. They can also help us to talk with their respective governments about how the rules could be strengthened or removed to make them as fair as possible.

Q: Legislators often hear from their electorate that WTO should be made more transparent and accountable and should take into account the interests of the citizens. How can this be achieved?
S.P.: This has always been part of the comments which people level at the WTO. With a large number of members and with the requirement that we must always base our decisions on consensus, it is not always efficient or even possible to involve everyone at the same time in the phase leading up to any final decision. So it has been a traditional procedure in this organisation when it comes to areas of specific interest to only a few countries, to start by consulting those countries first. But it is never meant to be a totally exclusive concept. By starting this way some building-blocks of consensus can be put in place so that eventually some sort of an agreement at that level can be brought to the attention of the full membership. It is up to the full membership to agree or disagree with the proposal for it to take effect. So, transparency or lack of transparency? Sometimes people tend to attribute too much to this process of consensus-building based upon formal or informal meetings. Some impressions are totally misconceived: in fact the process is just a way to construct a final consensus. What we have been trying to do to achieve more transparency is to have what we call heads of delegation meetings. In our recent meetings leading up to Cancún we have tried as far as possible to avoid small-room meetings except when we have the heads of delegation meetings, where everyone is involved. There seem to be some problems that still need to be solved among a group of countries that appear to have some difficulty with that issue. In certain areas, the chairman can appoint facilitators to find out more details that will be useful for the chairman to approach a satisfactory solution. We all are very mindful of transparency within this organisation. I want to stress the importance of heads of delegation meetings and will do so also at the Cancún meeting. At the same time, the need for the small group meetings will be there but we will make sure that our procedures always dictate that small group meetings are for fact-finding and for exploring ways to construct consensus, all of which has to be reported back to the committee as a whole or the heads of delegation meetings so that a final decision can be taken.

Q : What is your assessment of the WTO and IPU cooperation ?
S.P.: Well, I think it has always been important. Since the time of my predecessors I think we have all been interested in trying to find ways to improve our relationship with the IPU. At the moment my policy is that we should attend all the IPU meetings. In fact I have recommended to the IPU that they should put a regular item on their agenda on international trade so that they can follow up what happens in Geneva and obtain first-hand information on our activities. IPU Conferences have always been attended by WTO officials and, if I can go myself I certainly will. I look forward to going to the one to be organised in Cancún. I myself, having been a parliamentarian and having attended numerous IPU meetings, know how useful it is, so I am in favour of full support.