India Speaks Against Annex 4 Inclusion to Plurilateral Like Investment Facilitation Agreement

[ABS News Service/17.09.2026]

Geneva – India has circulated a proposal on plurilateral initiatives that underscores the need to develop guardrails for plurilateral initiatives and agreements within the WTO framework.

A day before the circulation of the Indian proposal, titled “Guiding Principles for Plurilateral Initiatives and Agreements at the WTO,” the United Kingdom also floated a proposal under the headline, “progress through flexibility: the case for plurilateral work at the WTO”.

Earlier this week, China also floated a proposal offering what it calls “a constructive approach” to exploring “ways to update the rules while upholding the WTO’s fundamental principles,” while pressing for a subtle change in the decision-making process so as to open the door for plurilateral initiatives.

India’s three-page proposal, however, seems to strike a new chord by articulating “guiding principles and safeguards for plurilateral initiatives”, as compared to other proposals.

Until now, India is the only country that has firmly opposed the Joint Statement Initiatives, including the sustained attempts by China and a large majority of countries to incorporate the Investment Facilitation for Development Agreement into the Annex 4 list of plurilateral agreements without following the rules in the Marrakesh Agreement that established the WTO in 1995.

Against this backdrop, India’s latest proposal on “guiding principles for plurilateral initiatives”, with guardrails, appears to retain the importance of following the multilateral rules in negotiating such agreements.

India says in its proposal that while members are attempting to “advance plurilateral initiatives within the WTO framework”, it is imperative to ensure “upholding the credibility of the multilateral trading system.”

The proponents of plurilateral initiatives suggested that they are only “complementary to, and not substitutes for, the multilateral trading system”, India argued.

At the same time, many members also suggested that “with reference to the challenges affecting multilateral outcomes, the reform discussions have pointed to weakened trust, unfulfilled mandates, lack of progress on substantive issues of interest to developing Members, lack of inclusivity and non-implementation of Ministerial mandates prescribing making special and differential treatment precise, effective and operational.”

Plurilaterals Not Enough Alone

According to India, “plurilateral cooperation may serve particular purposes, but does not, by itself, address these substantive and institutional sources of difficulty.”

“Further,” India says that “most importantly, in these discussions, Members have highlighted the importance of examining the legal and institutional implications of the plurilateral initiatives and agreements within the WTO, and developing a common understanding of appropriate safeguards, with a view to preserving the integrity of the WTO framework.”

India proposed a set of guiding principles or guardrails to undergird the approach to plurilateral initiatives and maintain their integrity in a multilateral trading system.

The considerations for developing a common understanding are as follows:

1. India points out that “the Marrakesh Agreement recognizes Plurilateral Trade Agreements in Annex 4. Agreement among participating Members establishes the terms of their cooperation; it does not, by itself, determine the legal or institutional consequences of that cooperation for the WTO and its Membership as a whole.”

2. It is in this context that India maintains that “a common understanding on safeguards for plurilateral initiatives can serve all Members. It can provide greater predictability to proponents; enable non-participants to understand and protect their rights and interests; preserve attention to existing mandates; and support confidence in the WTO as a Member-driven, inclusive and development-oriented multilateral institution.” More importantly, India says that “such safeguards can contribute to confidence building by ensuring that plurilateral cooperation complements the broader effort to strengthen the multilateral trading system”.

3. India insists that the principles to guide the development of safeguards “should be guided by the Marrakesh Agreement and be consistent with the foundational principles, objectives and rules of the WTO.”

Guiding Principles

According to India, “some guiding principles that assume particular importance include:

a. Preserving consensus-based decision-making : The letter and spirit of consensus-based decision-making are enshrined in several provisions of the Marrakesh Agreement. India says consensus-based decision-making “gives practical effect to the sovereign equality of Members.” Moreover, “in the reform discussions, Members have identified consensus-based decision-making among the foundational principles underpinning the functioning of the WTO, ensuring that all Member voices are respected in the decision-making process.”

b. Preserving the multilateral character of the WTO: India firmly maintains that “the Marrakesh Agreement established an integrated multilateral trading system.” Highlighting the negotiating history of the Uruguay Round negotiations, India says “Members made a deliberate commitment to reject the GATT à la carte approach”, given how “the GATT era witnessed a proliferation of the Tokyo 'codes' which were optional in nature and led to a fragmentation of the trading regime with different rules applying to different countries.”

Therefore, India argues that “the principle of multilateralism is enshrined in the Marrakesh Agreement including in its preamble.” “Plurilateral cooperation should complement rather than substitute for multilateral rulemaking,” India emphasized.

c. Preserving the rights, interests and agency of non-participants: India points out that “depending on their subject matter, design and intended institutional relationship with the WTO, plurilateral initiatives may have implications for existing rights and obligations of the members, the conduct of WTO work, the negotiating interests of Members, or the operation of the multilateral trading system.”

Therefore, New Delhi maintains that “while non-participation should remain a legitimate exercise of a Member's rights, it should not prejudice the rights or interests of non-participating Members in matters concerning the WTO framework.”

Development

d. Maintaining development, including special and differential treatment, at the center: India notes that “the Marrakesh Agreement including its preamble envisages positive efforts to ensure that developing countries including least developed countries, secure a share in the growth in international trade commensurate with the needs of their economic development.”

Therefore, according to India, “the development dimension of the WTO, including special and differential treatment, should remain central to WTO rule-making.” “The pursuit of plurilateral initiatives should not result in the marginalization of development priorities or divert attention and negotiating resources from issues of particular interest to developing and least-developed Members.”

e. Ensuring transparency, meaningful engagement and Member-driven processes: India says “transparency, openness and inclusiveness are critical,” with “information-sharing and formal openness can assist participation, but may not in every circumstance provide a sufficient opportunity for Members to understand an initiative's scope, its relationship with existing WTO rules and mandates, or its possible implications.”

India calls for “meaningful engagement by the Membership, taking into account the capacity constraints of smaller and resource-constrained delegations,” suggesting it “is therefore important.”

Mandates

f. Preserving mandates and the multilateral agenda: India says “the relationship of plurilateral initiatives with the existing WTO agreements, multilateral mandates, in-built agendas and the work of relevant WTO bodies should be considered carefully.”

India argues “this is particularly important where an initiative concerns matters already covered by WTO rules or overlaps with the work mandated by the Membership.”

g. Respecting institutional competence and scope of the WTO: India says “plurilateral initiatives should remain anchored in the mandate and institutional competence of the WTO.”

India notes that “initiatives concerning matters principally addressed in other international organizations, as well as initiatives that may extend beyond trade matters as covered by the Marrakesh Agreement, should be approached with due regard to institutional competence, coherence and the avoidance of duplication.”

Moreover, “such initiatives should complement, rather than duplicate or displace, work undertaken in other relevant international fora, and should preserve the coherence of the multilateral trading system and the distinct mandate of the WTO.”

h. WTO resources: Given the reportedly inappropriate use of WTO resources, including WTO Secretariat services, “in the recent past, India says that “without procedural safeguards, proliferation of plurilateral initiatives and agreements could put a strain on WTO resources and limited budget.”

It points out that “members may face challenges in authorizing the allocation of WTO budget and other resources to service these initiatives and any resulting agreements,” otherwise, “scarce resources would be diverted from required mandated uses, including technical assistance and capacity building.”

In short, India maintains that “WTO Members will find value in discussing and agreeing to a set of safeguards applicable to the plurilateral initiatives and agreements pursued under the umbrella of the WTO.”

“Such safeguards,” according to India, “should cover the various stages of initiation, negotiation, conclusion and incorporation of plurilateral agreements and their potential amendment”.

Furthermore, India says that “Members may also want to consider the legal form these safeguards may take in terms of their applicability to the WTO membership.”

In conclusion, India says that “member-driven and structured discussions in the decision-making pillar under WTO reform would be useful to develop a common understanding of the guiding principles and safeguards for plurilateral initiatives and agreements within the WTO framework.”

<Report>