The director-general of the World Trade Organisation (WTO), Dr Supachai Panitchpakdi, yesterday welcomed the release of the report of the consultative board chaired by Peter Sutherland, on the future of the WTO.

During 2003, Supachai commissioned a group of eight eminent persons to examine the state of the WTO as an institution, to study and clarify the institutional challenges that the system faced and to consider how the WTO can be reinforced to meet them.

"There is undoubtedly a need for serious reflection on how to improve our functioning while safeguarding the strengths of this institution,” Supachai said.

“It is especially appropriate that this report is issued in early 2005 as this year marks the tenth anniversary of the WTO.”

The report draws a number of conclusions under the headings: globalisation and the WTO - make the case for liberalising; time to respond to the erosion of nondiscrimination; concerns over sovereignty and the WTO - more gains than losses; cooridination and coherence - better global governance; dialogue with civil society - responsibilities on both sides; dispute settlement - a success that can be reinforced; moving negotiations forward - a new look at decision making and variable geometry; organisational changes to secure political reinforcement and efficient success; and getting the best out of the director-general and secretariat.

Board said it was concerned over the current spread of preferential trade agreements and recommends that governments show restraint in pursuing PFAs, or risk more damage to the multilateral trading system. It also suggests that a commitment by the members of the WTO to establish a date by which all most favoured nation tariffs and non-tariff measures will move to zero, should now be considered seriously. The report also said that preferential trade agreements need to be subject to meaningful review and effective disciplines in the WTO.

Under the heading of 'concerns over sovereignty' the report concluded that despite some concerns about the loss of sovereignty, the board felt that the benefits of being a member of the WTO outweighed the possible negative results.

The conclusion drawn under the 'coordination and coherence' section was that observer status should be granted solely on the basis of potential contribution to the WTO's role as a forum for trade negotiations. The report also said that international development agencies, chiefly the World Bank, should have, or should improve, programmes to fund trade policy adjustment assistance for developing countries.

Concerning dialogue with civil society, the board felt that membership should develop a set of clear objectives for the WTO's relations with civil society and the public at large.

“However, no single set of organisations should be constituted to the permanent exclusion of others. Further, the secretariat is under no obligation to engage seriously with groups whose express objective is to undermine or destroy the WTO,” the report said.

It added that a special effort should be made to assist local civil society organisations dealing with trade issues in least-developed countries, especially in Africa.

“Improved WTO relationships with civil society cannot be achieved without more resources,” the document said.

With regards to dispute settlement, the report indicated that the Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) should occasionally select particular findings for in-depth analysis by a reasonably impartial, special expert group of the DSB, so as to provide a measured report of constructive criticism for the information of the WTO system, including the Appellate Body and panels.

A number of other internal policy recommendations were given, including the suggestion that a WTO ministerial conference should be held every year and a summit of world leaders every five years; as well as greater clarity on the role of the director-general.