Preferential Trade Agreements and Trade Liberalization Efforts in the OIC Member States

With Special Emphasis on the TPS-OIC

After the conclusion of the Uruguay Round, many FTAs included IPRs provisions of a different

nature. Some of them were merely statements of general commitment to protect IPRs or some

form of cooperation between signatories. However, some agreements included specific and

details provisions on fields of IPRs such as geographic indications, patents, trademarks and

IP provisions. Additionally, 76 RTAs include reference to specific IPR types and 54 included

provisions on patents on pharmaceuticals. In general, agreements that include a developed

country within their members tend to include more substantial IPRs provisions such as border

measures (the provision to stop at the border products in violation of IPRs) and enforcement

procedures. For example, almost all the agreements signed by the EC, EFTA, Japan and the US

tend to have important chapters related to the protection and the enforcement of IPRs

(although IPRs provisions in the Canada-Chile and Canada-Costa Rica FTAs are particularly

limited). While the are examples of agreements, for example, signed by Chile, Mexico, ASEAN

or Korea which include provisions on IPRs, typically agreements signed be- tween developing

countries tend to be less strict with respect to the protection of property rights. For example,

ECOWAS, COMESA, EAC or the ANDEAN Community are relatively weak in this respect,

although these were signed before the conclusion of the Uruguay Round. Since the UR,

agreements without IPRs provisions have been more the exception than the rule.

Nevertheless, there is a clear asymmetry in the interests and capabilities across countries with

respect to IPR and IPR enforcement. Whilst developed countries tend to secure protection for

their IPRs, developing countries may find problems to effectively enforce the TRIPS provisions

and the disciplines on RTAs; but also some see these provisions as counter productive and

against their development process or in the case of pharmaceutical products, patent protection

might be seen as impeding access to medicaments and vaccines. This suggests that developing

countries may not be in a position of including and enforcing some property rights and a

special and differential treatment (based on objective criteria) has been advised (Lopez

Gonzalez, Mendez Parra, Holmes and Shingal, 2011).

Rules of origin and the use of preferences a possible effect of FTAs is what the literature has

called "trade deflection". This is where trade from non-FTA members takes advantage of the

free trade agreement between two other countries. Therefore, trade between members is

increased as a result of the trade that is channelled through their members from other

countries. As long as each signatory member maintains different MFN tariffs, there will be an

incentive to use the FTA as a way to channel non-members trade. In order to avoid this

phenomenon, FTAs agreements include a set of rules that determine when a product will be

considered to be original from one of the signatories or is originated in a non-member. Rules of

origin are, consequently, one of the most important elements of an FTA.

As discussed earlier, there are several methods for determining the origin of a product such as

the change in tariff criterion (CTC), value added criterion and processing requirements.

Increasingly, not a single method is used and it could vary between products within the same

FTA as some rules are more amenable to particular products. Moreover, it is frequently more