Office Address
123/A, Miranda City Likaoli Prikano, Dope
Phone Number
+0989 7876 9865 9
+(090) 8765 86543 85
Email Address
info@example.com
example.mail@hum.com
123/A, Miranda City Likaoli Prikano, Dope
+0989 7876 9865 9
+(090) 8765 86543 85
info@example.com
example.mail@hum.com
They submitted that the declaration should be brought formally into the
multilateral organisation’s fold as a `plurilateral agreement’ at the on-going
13th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC13) in Abu Dhabi, UAE. “India, together with
South Africa, has been opposed to making the IFD part of the WTO as there was
no Ministerial mandate for it and it had not been endorsed by the entire
membership when negotiations began informally on it,” a source tracking the
matter said. The US, too, is not a signatory to the pact.
The key pillars of the IFD
Agreement are its sections on transparency of investment measures;
streamlining and speeding-up investment-related authorisations procedures;
enhancing international cooperation, information sharing, and the exchange of
best practices; and sustainable investment. As a plurilateral pact, it would be
binding on only its signatories,
The proponents of the China-led agreement, which include developed
nations, developing countries, as well as LDCs, say that if incorporated in the
WTO, it would create clear and consistent global benchmarks for investment
facilitation, reducing regulatory uncertainty and making it easier for
investors to invest.
“India has stayed out of the
IFD as it believes that some of its provisions would put the onus on the
government to consult investors on policy matters which could encroach on its
policy space,” the source said.
New Delhi is opposed to its inclusion in the WTO as an Agreement to
Annex 4 of the Marrakesh Agreement, as requested by signatories, as the issue
does not have a Ministerial mandate which is a fundamental requirement. Also,
investment is not a trade issue and it had been decided in earlier Ministerials
that it should be kept out.
“If the IFD is included in the WTO it would set the precedent for more
such issues, that are not endorsed by all Trade Ministers, to be negotiated separately
by a few members and then brought into the WTO’s fold. It would totally go against the fundamental principles of the
multilateral organisation and change its structure,” the official said.
