Why is the compromise reached at WTO regarding the Covid-19 vaccine manufacturing not a Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) waiver?

Why is the compromise reached at WTO regarding the Covid-19 vaccine manufacturing not a Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) waiver? (2023, 10 Marks)

A waiver under Article IX of the Marrakesh Agreement suspends a treaty obligation for a period. What the Twelfth Ministerial Conference (MC12) adopted on 17 June 2022 was a Ministerial Decision on the TRIPS Agreement, which leaves the obligations standing and only eases an exception already inside them. That gap explains the verdict.

What was asked for

  • India and South Africa proposed on 2 October 2020 that four sections of Part II of TRIPS be suspended: patents, copyright, industrial designs and undisclosed information (trade secrets and test data).
  • It covered vaccines, therapeutics and diagnostics, applied to every member, and its May 2021 revision fixed a term of at least three years.

What was agreed

The text came out of a four-way bargain among the EU, the US, India and South Africa.

Proposal (2020)MC12 Decision (2022)
Legal effectObligations suspendedCompulsory licensing under Article 31 clarified
Rights coveredFour IP categoriesPatents only
ProductsVaccines, therapeutics, diagnosticsVaccines only
UsersAll membersDeveloping members; those with vaccine capacity urged to opt out (China did)
TermAt least three yearsFive years (to June 2027)
  • The only element actually waived was Article 31(f), so a licensed producer could export most of its output to other eligible members.
  • Conditions were added: steps against re-export, and adequate remuneration to the patent holder still applies.
  • A decision on therapeutics and diagnostics was due within six months; it never came.

Why it falls short of a waiver

  • Licence, not freedom. A producer still needs a government authorisation, product by product. The Article 31bis export route, built in 2003–05, was used only once (Canada to Rwanda, 2008).
  • Know-how untouched. Vaccine production depends on trade secrets and technology transfer, which the decision does not reach: the right to make a vaccine is not the ability to make it.
  • Too late. By mid-2022 the dose shortage had largely become a distribution problem.
  • Structural reading. Susan K. Sell, in Private Power, Public Law (2003), showed that TRIPS itself was written under corporate lobbying. Industry opposed even this narrow text.
  • The fight moved, unresolved. The WHO Pandemic Agreement (May 2025) leaves technology transfer voluntary and on mutually agreed terms, and its benefit-sharing annex was pushed back in May 2026 to 2027.

Conclusion

The MC12 outcome is a procedural clarification of compulsory licensing, not a suspension of rights. It restates the Doha Declaration (2001) flexibilities and adds one export easement. The South could set the agenda but not the terms, which made the episode a setback for global solidarity in an emergency.