Investor Obligations in International Investment Law
by David Cheng, Jai Abhijit Unde, and James Casey Ryan
Prepared for the South Centre as part of the Geneva Graduate Institute’s LL.M. Legal Clinic Programme
This report first outlines key instruments and different approaches that some States across Africa, Asia, Europe and the Americas have taken to reform the international investment regime in relation to investor obligations. Second, it charts the trends arising from investment tribunals following Urbaser across environmental and human rights cases. Third, it describes and evaluates the reform efforts at the multilateral level. Finally, it summarises and evaluates avenues for policy reform by States.
South Centre Statement to the 49th WIPO IGC Session
2 December 2024
We support the work by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC) to contribute to a more inclusive and just international intellectual property system and sustainable development.
South Centre Inputs to FfD4 Elements Paper – Debt Sustainability, Business and Finance, Taxation
By Yuefen Li, Danish, Abdul Muheet Chowdhary
The upcoming 4th conference on financing for development (FfD4) represents an important opportunity for developing countries to achieve a deep reform of the international financial architecture so that it meets their sustainable development needs and enhances the scale of development finance to fully realize the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. Based on the inputs provided by the South Centre to the FfD4 process, this policy brief highlights some of the key messages, problem statements and policy solutions in the areas of sovereign debt, private business and finance, and international tax cooperation that should be considered by the countries of the global South in their deliberations towards achieving ambitious outcomes at FfD4.
African researchers continue to face information-access barriers owing to copyright exclusivity preserved by the global copyright system that is designed and skewed towards protecting rights holders’ interests. A specific explicit human right to research is an important mechanism that can ensure an equitable balance between the private commercial interest of copyright owners and the public interest in promoting access to information for research in Africa. This article demonstrates how the right to research can be constructed from the normative content and scope of the rights to science and culture, education, property and freedom of expression provided for in international, regional and national human rights regimes in Africa.
Undue High Expectations of the G20 Common Framework: Urgent Need to Reform the International Debt Architecture
By Yuefen Li
This article stresses how international debt architecture reform requires innovative solutions beyond the G20 Common Framework, and should be addressed at the 4th International Conference on Financing for Development.
60 years of Contribution of the Group of 77 and China to Global South Coalition in International Development and Politics
By Yuefen Li and Danish
The New York Chapter of the Group of 77 and China (G77 and China) commemorated its 60th Anniversary on 25 October 2024 in New York. This document is based on the presentation made by Prof. Yuefen Li, Senior Advisor on South-South Cooperation and Development Finance at the South Centre, as part of the panel discussion held at the commemoration on the theme of “60 years of Contribution of the Group of 77 and China to Global South Coalition in International Development and Politics”.
South Centre Supports Civil Society and Research Institutions of the Global South to Raise Awareness on Antimicrobial Resistance
The South Centre is pleased to announce its funding support for numerous civil society and research institutions in the Global South to mark World Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) Awareness Week (WAAW) 2024. This initiative has continued for six years, contributing to the global response on AMR by empowering grassroots movements and local institutions.
Determining the Upper Bound of the Scoping Criteria for Amount B in the OECD/G20 Two-Pillar Solution: A Policy Guide for Developing Jurisdictions
By Chetan Rao, Ruchika Sharma, and Dr. Vijit Patel
Amount B, a component of the OECD/G20 Two-Pillar Solution, has been designed to simplify transfer pricing for baseline distribution activities. With the aim of developing a practical policy guide for developing jurisdictions to fine tune the quantitative scoping criterion under Amount B, i.e., “annual operating expense to annual net revenue” ratio, this paper critically analyses various aspects of this criterion. The upper bound of this ratio is purported to help jurisdictions in identifying baseline distributors. It is currently set as a flexible range from 20% to 30%, with the choice available to each adopting jurisdiction deciding the exact point in the range for implementation of Amount B within its jurisdiction. Given the lack of any data-backed rationale in the Amount B report for development of this range, the authors suggest that the upper bound range might have been politically negotiated. For this very reason, developing countries need to tread carefully while setting the upper-bound and consider both its tax as well as policy implications. Through an empirical analysis of independent distributors in India, the paper highlights the link between the upper bound, functionality, and profitability, illustrating how these metrics impact developing countries with lower asset and expense intensities. The findings suggest that setting the upper bound at the higher end of the range could unintentionally bring above-baseline distributors into scope, thus foregoing long-term taxing rights for developing jurisdictions. Through this analysis, the paper offers practical insights and recommendations for jurisdictions, especially developing ones, for setting this upper bound to protect their taxing rights and minimize risks of misclassification of above-baseline distributors as baseline.
Health, Intellectual Property and Biodiversity Programme, November 2024
The following matrix provides a factual overview and analysis of the standing and non-standing agenda items of the regular session of the WTO TRIPS Council of 6-7 November. The matrix also discusses the TRIPS Implementation issues as part of the WTO Doha Development Round of negotiations.
Régulation internationale des dessins et modèles industriels : l’Accord sur les ADPIC à l’aune du droit de l’Union européenne
Par Adèle Sicot
Ce document analyse les dispositions de l’Accord sur les aspects des droits de propriété intellectuelle qui touchent au commerce (l’Accord sur les ADPIC) sur les dessins et modèles et la manière dont les aspects limités traités par l’Accord ont été abordés par la législation de l’Union Européenne (l’UE). Il note l’absence d’une définition de la matière susceptible de protection et une considérable flexibilité laissée aux pays membres de l’Organisation Mondiale du Commerce pour déterminer le cadre de protection, notamment sur la base du droit d’auteur. Le document note aussi certains aspects dans lesquels la législation européenne est plus élaborée et d’autres dans lesquels on pourrait observer une incompatibilité avec l’Accord sur les ADPIC.
De nouvelles pandémies sont inéluctables. Comment mieux s’y préparer et surtout comment éviter les erreurs et injustices commises durant la pandémie du Covid-19 ? Des négociations sont en cours pour formuler un traité international contraignant sur la prévention et la préparation pour des réponses plus justes aux futures pandémies. Ce livre se veut une contribution critique aux débats en cours.
Comment garantir l’accès équitable aux médicaments et diagnostics, alors que la majorité d’entre eux sont produits dans un petit nombre de pays ? Comment expliquer que le financement actuel de la coopération en matière de santé se retrouve entre les mains d’un groupe réduit de pays et fondations du Nord ? Comment renforcer le rôle de l’Organisation mondiale de la santé, qui ne joue plus qu’un rôle mineur dans la coordination des politiques de santé publique ? Comment se fait-il que le concept de « médicaments essentiels », une avancée majeure dans les politiques de santé publique, soit remplacé par celui de « contre-mesures médicales », un terme qui s’accorde plutôt à la logique de profit du secteur privé ?
La préparation aux futures pandémies nous oblige à nous interroger : comment préserver l’intérêt général, la défense des droits de l’homme et la santé publique ?
Auteur: Germán Velásquez est conseiller spécial en matière de politique et de santé au South Centre à Genève.
Details: