11th WTO Ministerial – Letter from Global Civil Society about the Agenda of the WTO

[Delivery date: 9 October, 2017]

Below this whole letter, you are going to find links with pdfs about this letter, in French, Español, and Greek. Here you have the English version:

11th WTO Ministerial – Letter from Global Civil Society about the Agenda of the WTO

Dear Members of the World Trade Organization (WTO),

We are writing as 300[i] member organizations of global civil society from more than 150 countries, representing tens of millions of people from around the world, regarding the ongoing negotiations on the WTO towards the 11^th Ministerial meeting (MC11) in Buenos Aires, December 10-13, 2017.

We are increasingly concerned about press reports indicating that some WTO members are pushing a dangerous and inappropriate new agenda under the disguising rubric of “e-commerce,” even though there was no consensus to introduce this new issue during or since the Nairobi Ministerial. In addition, we are deeply disturbed by reports that the urgent need to change existing WTO rules which are constraining governments’ policy space for job creation and development, including achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), is becoming further blocked in the lead-up to the 11^th Ministerial.

Citizens around the world have given clear messages to governments that the current rules of the global economy, including global trade rules, have exacerbated inequality and left far too many impoverished. Thus, we urge WTO members to reflect on this dynamic and to take decisions that will allow the global trading system to contribute to, rather than constrain, shared prosperity and development.

Below we outline our concerns regarding the following issues that are being, or should be, discussed in WTO:

Proposals regarding e-commerce and their impact on national laws and regulations;
Proposals to limit the scope and effects of public interest regulation;
Fish subsidy disciplines that discourage overfishing by rich countries but still allow poor countries to grow;
The time has come to fix bad existing WTO rules, not to expand them;
Agricultural rules must prioritize food security and food sovereignty;
There is a need for more flexibility for development policies.

Wrong Agenda: E-commerce

A number of new e-commerce proposals have been made at the WTO in the last year. Proponents often disguise their proposals under the rubric of e-commerce as being necessary to unleash development through the power of small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). But SMEs are the least likely to be able to compete with giant transnational corporations, which enjoy the benefits of scale, historic subsidies, technological advances, strong state-sponsored infrastructure, tax avoidance strategies, and a system of trade rules written for them and by their lawyers.

Key provisions of the proposals include prohibiting requirements to hold data locally; to have a local presence in the country; no border taxes on digital products; prohibitions on regulating cross-border data transfers; and even prohibitions on requiring open source software in government procurement contracts. There is no economic rationale as to why digitally traded goods should not have to contribute to the national tax base, while traditionally traded goods usually do. Data is now the most valuable resource; furthermore, privacy and data protection are fundamental human rights and they cannot be abandoned in the interests of trade. Locking in rules in the WTO to allow corporations to transfer data around the world without restrictions would forever deny the right of countries and citizens to benefit from their own data and intelligence in the future, and it would restrict the ability of countries to implement appropriate data privacy and consumer protection measures. What e-commerce proposal proponents call “localization barriers” are actually the tools that countries use to ensure that they can benefit from the presence of transnational corporations to advance their own development and the economic, social, and political rights of their citizens.

We need trade rules that allow for the creation of decent jobs, including in the technology sector. But the hallmarks of companies like Amazon, Facebook, Google, and Uber include dislocation of local businesses and labor markets, and increasing precariousness of work. These would accelerate if e-commerce proposals were accepted in the WTO. Existing technology giants would be able to further consolidate their monopoly power. Their infamous tax optimization (which is tantamount to evasion), including base erosion and profit shifting, would be facilitated by a binding international treaty, and it would be nearly impossible to rein in the political instability engendered by the economic and financial consequences of such a scenario.

WTO members do not currently have a mandate to negotiate new global rules on “e-commerce,” and they should not obtain one in Buenos Aires. All of the issues proposed for the e-commerce agenda have either already been discussed and resolved, or are currently being discussed, in other forums, most of which are more responsive and accountable to public interest concerns than the WTO. E-commerce is already flourishing and SMEs can already sell their products online without new WTO rules. Of course, e-commerce can be a force for job creation and development, and certainly has the power to expand innovation, increase consumer choice, and connect remote producers and consumers. But supporting e-commerce is not the same as having binding global rules that would primarily benefit U.S.-based high-tech corporations, at the expense of public interest regulation to protect consumers and promote development. While we support efforts by developing countries to address the digital divide, transfer technology, and obtain financing for infrastructure and information and communications technologies (ICTs), the WTO is not the proper forum to negotiate these issues; similar to the way other development issues have been treated in the WTO, they will not become binding obligations, while the agenda of the high-tech corporations will be binding. There should absolutely be no new mandate on e-commerce in MC11.

Threats to Public Interest Regulation

The SDGs recently agreed by all WTO members include a focus on expanding access to and quality of many public services, as well as key services often operated by the private sector such as financial services and telecommunications. Unfortunately, much like the e-commerce agenda, a similar corporate agenda is behind the effort to have new rules limiting domestic regulation of services. The proposed rules on Domestic Regulation in the services negotiations in the WTO seek to ensure that three kinds of regulation – qualification requirements and procedures, licensing requirements and procedures, and technical standards – meet vague and open-ended standards that would severely undermine the regulatory sovereignty of countries.

These are open-ended terms designed to minimize regulation and maximize the lobbying power of transnational corporations over sovereign governments. Giving the WTO jurisdiction to adjudicate whether a regulation was “reasonable,” “objective,” “transparent,” and “not more burdensome than necessary to ensure the quality of the service,” and further that a technical standard was developed in an “open and transparent process” would put the interests of foreign services providers above governments’ obligation to ensure that services are operated in the public interest. It is not the WTO that should decide whether the administration of labor, tax, environmental or safety laws affecting foreign services firms is “reasonable.” The WTO should not be given authority to decide if the local zoning commission’s agreement with local objections to place a big box store near a historic site is “objective.” If a state decides to accept an environmental review’s recommendation to ban fracking as a method of mining gas, a WTO panel should not have the jurisdiction to decide if that is “too burdensome.” Local governments – not trade panels – should have the ultimate authority to decide community issues that are inherently subjective because they involve important judgment calls. And foreign companies should not have “rights” to comment or input on measures proposed by local or national authorities before they are decided domestically.

Members did agree years ago to develop any necessary disciplines on these measures – but there has never been an agreement whether such rules are “necessary,” which they obviously are not. Thus, no disciplines should be agreed on domestic regulation in Buenos Aires.

Fishing: Subsidizing the Poor or the Rich?

The other big ‘deliverable’ being pushed for Buenos Aires is a way to tackle the problem of overfishing by negotiating limits to the subsidies that governments provide to fisheries. There is a clear mandate for a pro-development and pro-environment outcome; but this cannot be lost due to the insistence of existing industrial fishing nations on rules that undermine the future developmental aspirations of developing countries. Despite the use of subsidies to build their industrial fishing capacity, those very same nations are attempting to prevent other developing countries from also building their domestic capacity, undermining development and doing little to prevent illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing as well as over-fishing. For many developing countries, fisheries are at the heart of their economic and developmental aspirations. Protecting the policy space of developing countries and the ability to support small-scale and artisanal fishers must be at the heart of any outcome, along with effective, binding prohibitions on subsidies. The developmental and economic policy space of developing countries must be maintained whilst those nations that have contributed most to the problem of IUU and overfishing must agree to eliminate harmful subsidies. The management of fisheries resources must be maintained outside of the WTO.

What Should Be on the Agenda: Fixing Bad Existing Rules Not Expanding Them

Both e-commerce rules and domestic regulation disciplines would amount to an expansion of the WTO. But the vast majority of WTO members have argued that existing unfair and damaging rules must be fixed before the WTO can be expanded. This fight was at the heart of the last Ministerial in Nairobi, which concluded with ambiguous language acknowledging that some countries wanted to bring in other issues, while others (the overwhelming majority) want to continue with the unfinished development agenda that had been the reason they had agreed to the Doha Round.

Unfortunately, some WTO members are obstinately refusing to move forward on what should be the core agenda: to fix the unjust rules that hinder global efforts to ensure true food security, sustainable development, access to affordable healthcare and medicines, and global financial stability, outlined in the Turnaround Statement of the global Our World Is Not for Sale (OWINFS) network, endorsed by hundreds of civil society groups from around the world. At a minimum, in Buenos Aires, WTO members should focus on transforming the global agriculture rules that restrict developing countries from ensuring food security for their populations (while allowing big agribusiness nearly limitless public subsidies) and increasing flexibilities for developing countries to be able use trade for their own development.

Agricultural Rules Must Prioritize Food Security and Food Sovereignty

The top priority for a genuine development agenda would be transforming the current rules on agriculture. Unbelievably, it is the rich countries, not the poor, which are currently allowed to subsidize agriculture under WTO rules – even in ways that distort trade and harm other countries’ domestic producers. The tens of billions of dollars of subsidies allowed in developed countries per annum encourage overproduction and artificially depress world prices, wiping out farmers’ livelihoods in countries that should be benefitting from global agricultural trade or production for domestic consumption. Thus, a major outcome in Buenos Aires should be to reduce the amount of subsidies under the “domestic support” negotiations – including subsidies in the so-called “Green Box” category of subsidies when these actually have trade-distorting impacts.

Given the existing subsidies, developing countries should also be able to increase tariffs to protect domestic production when faced with import surges. Unfortunately, some countries are opposing negotiations towards a workable “Special Safeguard Mechanism (SSM)” for developing countries. An outcome on SSM – unconditioned on further tariff cuts – at the upcoming Ministerial would greatly enhance developing countries’ ability to achieve food security, promote rural development and safeguard farmers’ livelihoods – and would be a step towards removing WTO constraints on Food Sovereignty.

By contrast, most developing countries are only allowed miniscule subsidies. But the SDGs entreat countries to increase investment in sustainable agriculture. Also, there is growing acceptance of the “right to food” as a human right. One of the international best practices for supporting farmers’ livelihoods, ensuring food security, and promoting rural development is “public stockholding,” in which governments guarantee farmers a minimum price for their production, and distribute that food to hungry people within their own borders. But these programs, implemented in dozens developing countries, often run afoul of WTO rules – even though the agriculture supported is not traded in global markets.

The majority of WTO members have agreed that domestic public stockholding programs should not be constrained by antiquated WTO rules. But the changes have been steadfastly blocked by the United States, the EU, Australia and other big agribusiness exporters. And now reality is being turned on its head as China and India are being accused of being the biggest subsidizers, when their payments per farmer on a per capita basis remain miniscule – only a few hundred dollars per farmer, as compared to tens of thousands for the United States.

WTO members agreed to find a permanent solution to the public stockholding programs by December of this year. Unfortunately the positions of countries representing big agribusiness exporters have remained entrenched. In Buenos Aires WTO members must deliver a positive resolution on the public stockholding issue that allows all developing countries to implement food security programs without onerous restrictions that are not even demanded of developed countries’ trade distorting subsidies.

More Flexibility for Development Policies

Along with transforming the global rules governing agricultural trade, developing countries have long advocated for other changes to the existing WTO to increase flexibility for them to enable them to enact policies that would promote their own development.

The group of 90 developing countries has made concrete proposals for changes to existing WTO rules that would remove some WTO constraints on national pro-development policies. Many of them are updated versions of the “Implementation Agenda” that have formed the basis of developing country critiques of the existing WTO since the time of its foundation. These include, for example, changes to allow developing countries to promote domestic manufacturing capabilities, stimulate the transfer of technology, promote access to affordable medicines, and safeguard regional integration. Many of these proposals parallel the civil society demands encompassed in the OWINFS Turnaround Statement. The G90 proposals should be accepted in the Buenos Aires Ministerial as proposed – without being conditioned on further market access concessions from developing countries.

Even in an area that all WTO members should be able to agree on – ensuring benefits for Least Developed Countries (LDCs) – there is no consensus yet. Although it was a priority mandate, the small LDC package agreed in the WTO Ministerial in Bali in 2013 is not yet operationalized. This includes ensuring 100 percent Duty Free, Quota Free market access for LDCs’ exports; simplification of the Rules of Origin that define how much of the value of a product has to be produced in the country to qualify for reduced-tariff benefits; and providing actual binding commitments for the LDC services waiver (which allows developed countries to provide market access in services for LDCs without offering reciprocal access to other countries – a “flexibility” which has proven almost impossible to utilize). It also includes mandated reductions in the subsidies that the US and the EU provide to cotton producers – which enrich a few thousand there, but that have unfairly decimated production of hundreds of thousands of cotton farmers in Africa. This modest LDC package must be strengthened and made operational by the time of MC11.

Much is at stake this December in Buenos Aires. We believe in a democratic, transparent, and sustainable multilateral trading system, and do not want to see the WTO depart even further from that ideal. The secretive and anti-democratic practice of negotiating behind closed doors with only certain powerful members, and then bringing massive pressure to bear on developing countries to accept another bad deal, which has characterized the WTO since its inception but has become even more pronounced in the last two Ministerials, must be abandoned in favor of a transparent and member-driven process that leads to outcomes that are consistent with the multilaterally-agreed Sustainable Development Goals.

Will members agree to a harmful new mandate on e-commerce and new rules limiting the democratic oversight over services regulations? And new rules on fishing subsidies which end up harming poor fisherfolk? Or will members act in the interest of their citizens and change course at the WTO, removing WTO constraints over domestic policies that promote food security and development, and supporting LDCs in their efforts to increase their share of global trade?

We urge you to make the right decision for a positive outcome at the upcoming MC11 in Buenos Aires.

Sincerely,

Endorsers as of October 8, 2017:

International and Regional Networks

1.	ACP Civil Society Forum	The Forum is a coalition of 80 not-for-profit organisations working on issues relating to ACP-EU development cooperation. It seeks to cater for the diverse range civil society development issues within the wide geographic coverage of the ACP group.
2.	Africa Network for Environment and Economic Justice (ANEEJ)	ANEEJ is a non-government organization whose goal is to amplify the voice of the weak, the less privileged and the marginalized groups in the society including women, youths, and People Living With Disabilities in order to increase their participation in the democratic decision-making process.
3.	African Women Economic Policy Network (AWEPON)	AWEPON is a women’s Pan African organization with memberships in 22 African countries with an ultimate goal of influencing policies that are harmful to women and the poor population at large.
4.	Arab NGO Network for Development (ANND)	ANND is a regional network, working in 12 Arab countries with seven national networks (with an extended membership of 200 CSOs from different backgrounds) and 23 NGO members.
5.	Asia Pacific Forum on Women, Law and Development (APWLD)	APWLD is a network of 218 women’s rights organisations and movements in 26 countries across the Asia Pacific region working toward the achievement of women’s human rights and Development Justice.
6.	Association of Women’s Rights in Development (AWID)	AWID is a global feminist organization with membership in 164 countries.
7.	Confederación Latinoamericana y del Caribe de Trabajadores Estatales (CLATE)	CLATE es una organización sindical internacional que reúne a sindicatos de trabajadores del sector público de 17 países de América Latina y el Caribe. Fue fundada en 1967 y está integrada por más de 26 organizaciones sindicales de la región.
8.	Coordinadora de Centrales Sindicales del Cono Sur (CCSCS)	La Coordinadora de Centrales Sindicales del Cono Sur nuclea a 20 centrales de Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Bolivia, Paraguay y Uruguay.
9.	Development Alternatives with Women for a New Era (DAWN)	DAWN is a network of feminist scholars, researchers and activists from the economic South working for economic and gender justice and sustainable and democratic development.
10.	Ecowas Network on Debt and Development (ECONDAD)	ECONDAD is a network of civil society organizations working on debt and economic justice from ECOWAS (Economic Community of West African States).
11.	Education International (EI)	Education International is a global union federation of teachers’ trade unions consisting of 401 member organisations in 172 countries and territories that represents over 30 million education personnel from pre-school through university.
12.	European Federation of Public Service Unions (EPSU)	EPSU is the largest federation of the ETUC and is the regional organization of Public Services International (PSI). It comprises 8 million public service workers from over 265 trade unions, including in the energy, water and waste sectors, health and social services and local and national administration, in all European countries including in the EU’s Eastern Neighborhood.
13.	Fair Trade Advocacy Office	The Fair Trade Advocacy Office is a joint advocacy initiative of the two main global Fair Trade networks: Fairtrade International and the World Fair Trade Organisation. FOEI is the world’s largest grassroots environmental network, uniting 75 national member groups and some 5,000 local activist groups on every continent counting over 2 million members and supporters around the world.
14.	Friends of the Earth International (FOEI)	FOEI is the world’s largest grassroots environmental network, uniting 75 national member groups and some 5,000 local activist groups on every continent with over 2 million members around the world.
15.	Internacional de Servicios Publicos (ISP) Interamericas	En América del Norte, Central y del Sur, y el Caribe la ISP cuenta con 140 organizaciones sindicales afiliadas en 35 países, que representan a un total de 3,3 millones de trabajadores afiliados.
16.	International Federation of Musicians (FIM)	The FIM, founded in 1948, is the international organisation for musicians’ unions and equivalent representative organisations, including 70 members in 60 countries throughout the world.
17.	International Grail Justice in Trade Agreement Network	A coalition of groups working for peace and justice in 20 countries worldwide.
18.	International Union of Food, Agricultural, Hotel, Restaurant, Catering, Tobacco and Allied Workers’ Associations (IUF)	The IUF is currently composed of 385 trade unions in 123 countries representing a combined representational membership of over 12 million workers (including a financial membership of 2.6 million).
19.	Just Net Coalition	The Just Net Coalition is a global network of civil society actors committed to an open, free, just and equitable Internet.
20.	LDC Watch	LDC Watch is a global alliance of national, regional and international civil society organisations (CSOs), networks and movements based in the Least Developed Countries (LDCs).
21.	Mesa de Coordinación Latinoamericana de Comercio	A network of fair trade groups from Latin America and the Caribbean.
22.	Pacific Network on Globalization (PANG)	The Pacific Network on Globalisation is a regional network focused on promoting economic self-determination and justice in the Pacific Islands.
23.	Pan African NGO Consortium on Agriculture	A network of organizations from throughout Africa working on issues of agriculture and development.
24.	PRESSENZA International News Agency	PRESSENZA es una Agencia Internacional de Noticias de Paz y Noviolencia.
25.	Public Services International (PSI)	Public Services International (PSI) is a global trade union federation dedicated to promoting quality public services in every part of the world. PSI brings together more than 20 million workers, represented by 650 unions in 150 countries and territories.
26.	Red de Género y Comercio – Capítulo Latino-americano	Fue crada em 1999 como parte de la red Internacional de Genero y Comercio IGTN e ha continuado acompanhando los temas comerciales y sus impactos de género, en los TLCs, TBIs y en el ambito multilateral de la OMC.
27.	Red Intercontinental de Economia Social y Solidaria de Latinoamerica RIPESS-LAC	RIPESS-LAC is a network of CSOs in Latin America working on economic justice and alternatives to neoliberalism.
28.	Society for International Development (SID)	SID is an international network of individuals and organizations founded in 1957 to promote participative, pluralistic and sustainable development.
29.	Southern Africa Development Community Council of Non Governmental Organisations (SADC-CNGO)	SADC-CNGO is a regional umbrella body of NGOs operating in all the 15 Member States of the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC). SADC-CNGO was formed in 1998 with the aim of facilitating effective and meaningful engagement between civil society in the region and SADC institutions at national, regional, continental and global levels.
30.	Southern Africa Trade Union Coordination Council (SATUCC)	SATUCC brings together 21 national trade union federation in the Southern Africa Development Community (SADC) with a combined membership of 6 million working women and men.
31.	Third World Network (TWN)	TWN is an independent non-profit international network of organisations and individuals involved in issues relating to development, developing countries and North-South affairs.
32.	Third World Network – Africa	TWN-Africa is the autonomous African section of the Third World Network, an independent coalition of organisations and individuals engaged in advocacy on issues related to development, environment, and North-South affairs.
33.	UNI Americas	UNI Americas represents 4 million workers in the Americas and the Caribbean. We are part of the 20-million strong UNI Global Union family which has affiliated 900 unions in 140 countries globally.
34.	Unión Latina de Economía Política de la Información, la Comunicación y la Cultura (ULEPICC)	ULEPICC es una asociación científica internacional de pensamiento crítico lo cual, desde 2002, aborda las transformaciones de las industrias culturales y las formas de poder, acceso y control de la información, la cultura y el conocimiento.
35.	West African Institute for Trade and Development	An institute of scholars from West African countries that advocate on trade and development issues.
36.	Women in Development Europe (WIDE+)	WIDE+ is the network that follows up the previous WIDE network (a member of Seattle to Brussels, S2B), composed of feminists, NGO’s, and researchers who advocate for a socially just economy.

National Organizations

37.	Trade Union of Building, Wood and Public Service of Albania (FSNDSHPSH)	Albania
38.	Anguilla Civil Service Association	Anguilla
39.	Antigua & Barbuda Public Service Association (ABPSA)	Antigua & Barbuda
40.	Antigua & Barbuda Trade Union Congress (ABTUC)	Antigua & Barbuda
41.	Antigua & Barbuda Workers’ Union	Antigua & Barbuda
42.	Amigos de la Tierra Argentina	Argentina
43.	Confederación General del Trabajo de la República Argentina (CGT)	Argentina
44.	Confederación de Trabajadores Municipales (CTM)	Argentina
45.	Federación Argentina de Empleados de Comercio y Servicios (FAECYS)	Argentina
46.	Foro Ciudadano de Participación por la Justicia y los Derechos Humanos (FOCO)	Argentina
47.	Fundación Vía Libre	Argentina
48.	Instituto Justiça Fiscal	Argentina
49.	Unión del Personal Civil de la Nación (UPCN)	Argentina
50.	World Labour Institute Julio Godio – UNTREF	Argentina
51.	Australian Fair Trade and Investment Network	Australia
52.	New South Wales Nurses and Midwives Association	Australia
53.	Information Group on Latin America (IGLA)	Austria
54.	Bahrain Transparency Society	Bahrain
55.	Bangladesh Krishok Federation	Bangladesh
56.	Bangladesh Women Welfare Workers Union (BWWWU)	Bangladesh
57.	COAST Trust	Bangladesh
58.	Gonoshasthaya Kendra	Bangladesh
59.	Sramik Karmachari Union PGCBSKU, Dhaka	Bangladesh
60.	VOICE	Bangladesh
61.	The National Union of Public Workers	Barbados
62.	11.11.11	Belgium
63.	Centrale Générale des Services Publics (CGSP)	Belgium
64.	CNCD-11.11.11 (Centre national de coopération au développement)	Belgium
65.	Confédération des Syndicats Chrétiens, the Confederation of Christian Trade Unions (ACV-CSC)	Belgium
66.	National Alliance of Christian Mutual Health Funds (ANMC-LCM) / Alliance Nationale des Mutualités Chrétiennes (ANMC)	Belgium
67.	Public Service Union of Belize	Belize
68.	Bermuda Public Services Union	Bermuda
69.	Fundación REDES de Bolivia	Bolivia
70.	Plataforma Boliviana frente al Cambio Climático	Bolivia
71.	A Casa 8 de Março – Organização feminista do Tocantins	Brazil
72.	Articulação de Mulheres Brasileiras (AMB)	Brazil
73.	CONTAG	Brazil
74.	Federação dos Trabalhadores Municipais de Santa Catarina (FETRAM-SC/CUT)	Brazil
75.	Federação Nacional dos Servidores do Judiciário nos Estados (FENAJUD)	Brazil
76.	GAPARS – Grupo de Apoio A Prevenção da AIDS do RS	Brazil
77.	Gestos (HIV and AIDS, Communication, Gender)	Brazil
78.	INESC	Brazil
79.	Instituto EQUIT – Genero, Economia e Cidadania Global	Brazil
80.	Jubileo Sul – Brasil	Brazil
81.	Rede Brasileira Pela Integração dos Povos (REBRIP)	Brazil
82.	Rede Social de Justiça e Direitos Humanos	Brazil
83.	Sindicato dos Enfermeiros no Estado de Pernambuco (SEEPE)	Brazil
84.	Sindicato dos Trabalhadores Públicos da Saúde no Estado de São Paulo (SINDSAUPE/SP)	Brazil
85.	SOS Corpo – Instituto Feminista para a Democracia	Brazil
86.	União Geral dos Trabalhadores (UGT)	Brazil
87.	Cambodian Food and Service Workers’ Federation (CFSWF)	Cambodia
88.	Social Action for Change	Cambodia
89.	Africa Development Interchange Network (ADIN)	Cameroon
90.	Réseau National de l’Économie Sociale et Solidaire du Cameroun (RESSCAM)	Cameroon
91.	Council of Canadians	Canada
92.	National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE)	Canada
93.	Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC)	Canada
94.	Syndicat de la fonction publique et parapublique du Québec (SFPQ)	Canada
95.	Syndicat de professionnelles et professionnels du gouvernement du Québec	Canada
96.	AFRICANDO	Canary Islands
97.	Confederación Nacional de Funcionarios de Salud Municipal (CONFUSAM-Chile)	Chile
98.	Corporacion Innovarte	Chile
99.	Federación Nacional de Trabajadores de Obras Sanitarias (FENATRAOS-Chile)	Chile
100.	Políticas Farmacéuticas CEPFAR	Chile
101.	Federación Nacional de Profesionales Universitarios de los Servicios de Salud (FENPRUSS)	Chile
102.	Asociacion Ambiente y Sociedad	Colombia
103.	Camara Colombiana de la Economia Social y Solidaria (CCESS)	Colombia
104.	Comité Ambiental en Defensa de la Vida	Colombia
105.	Federación de Vocales de Control de los Servicios Públicos de la Región Centro y Bogotá	Colombia
106.	Federación Nacional de Entidades Acreditadas para Impartir Educacion Solidaria (FENALSE)	Colombia
107.	Fundación Colombia Digna (FUNCOLDIG)	Colombia
108.	Red Educacion Popular Entre Mujeres (REPEM)	Colombia
109.	SINTRACUAVALLE	Colombia
110.	Asociación Nacional de Educadores de Costa Rica (ANDE)	Costa Rica
111.	Friends of the Earth/Amigos de la Tierra Costa Rica (COECOCEIBA)	Costa Rica
112.	Sindicato de Empleados del Ministerio de Hacienda (SINDHAC)	Costa Rica
113.	Confederacion Nacional de Unidad Sindical (CNUS)	Dominican Republic
114.	La Fundación Étnica Integral (La FEI)	Dominican Republic
115.	Sindicato Nacional de Enfermería (SINATRAE)	Dominican Republic
116.	Asociación Latinoamericana de Educación y Comunicación Popular (ALER)	Ecuador
117.	Colectivo El Punto	Ecuador
118.	Comité de Empresa de los Trabajadores de ETAPA EP	Ecuador
119.	El Centro de Documentación en Derechos Humanos “Segundo Montes Mozo S.J.” (CSMM)	Ecuador
120.	Movimiento de Economía Social y Solidaria del Ecuador (MESSE)	Ecuador
121.	Ojo al Dato	Ecuador
122.	Sindicato de Trabajadores del Instituto Salvadoreño del Seguro Social (STISSS)	El Salvador
123.	Grenada Public Workers Union	Grenada
124.	Fairtrade Finland	Finland
125.	Finnish NGDO Platform to the EU Kehys	Finland
126.	Kepa (a former Service Centre for Development Cooperation)	Finland
127.	Pro Ethical Trade Finland	Finland
128.	SOL	France
129.	Worldview-The Gambia	Gambia
130.	Brot für die Welt/Bread for the World, Germany	Germany
131.	Ecumenical Service on Southern Africa (KASA)	Germany
132.	Forschungs- und Dokumentationszentrum Chile-Lateinamerika e.V. (FDCL)	Germany
133.	Advocates & Trainers for Children & Women’s Advancement & Rights (ATCWAR)	Ghana
134.	Friends of Forest Reserves and Verging Groves	Ghana
135.	Consumer Association the Quality of Life (EKPIZO)	Greece
136.	Naturefriends	Greece
137.	STOP TTIP CETA TiSA – Greece	Greece
138.	Confédération des Travailleurs des Secteurs Public et Privé (CTSP)	Haiti
139.	Friends of the Earth/Amigos de la Tierra Haiti/Suirve	Haiti
140.	Plateforme haïtienne de Plaidoyer pour un Développement Alternatif (PAPDA)	Haiti
141.	Platfom Rezistans Peyizan Latibonit (PREPLA)	Haiti
142.	Asociación Madre Tierra	Honduras
143.	Alliance for Sustainable & Holistic Agriculture (ASHA)	India
144.	Anti-FTA Committee	India
145.	Centre for Research and Advocacy, Manipur	India
146.	Diverse Women for Diversity	India
147.	Forum Against FTAs	India
148.	Gene Campaign	India
149.	Hazards Centre	India
150.	Indian Social Action Forum (INSAF)	India
151.	Initiative for Health & Equity in Society	India
152.	IT for Change	India
153.	Kheti Virasat Mission	India
154.	KIRDTI, Odisha	India
155.	Madhyam	India
156.	Nagpur Municipal Corporation Employees Union	India
157.	National Organisation of Government Employees	India
158.	New Trade Union Initiative (NTUI)	India
159.	Sunray Harvesters	India
160.	Tamil Nadu Federation of Women Farmers’ Rights (TNFWFR)	India
161.	Tamil Nadu Women’s Forum (TNWF)	India
162.	Friends of the Earth Indonesia/WALHI	Indonesia
163.	Indonesia for Global Justice	Indonesia
164.	LIPS (Sedane Labor Resource Center)	Indonesia
165.	Trocaire Ireland	Ireland
166.	Fairwatch	Italy
167.	Jamaica Civil Service Association	Jamaica
168.	Phenix Center for Economic Studies	Jordan
169.	Building Eastern Africa Community Network (BEACON)	Kenya
170.	Growth Partners Africa	Kenya
171.	Kenya Food Rights Alliance (KeFRA)	Kenya
172.	Kenya Network of Grassroots Organisations (K.E.N.G.O)	Kenya
173.	Kenya Small Scale Farmer’s Forum	Kenya
174.	Lebanon Support	Lebanon
175.	National Federation of Workers and Employees trade unions (FENASOL)	Lebanon
176.	NGOs platform of Saida	Lebanon
177.	Consumers Protection Association (CPA)	Lesotho
178.	Development for Peace Education (DPE)	Lesotho
179.	Policy Analysis and Research Institute of Lesotho (PARIL)	Lesotho
180.	Women and Youth Empowerment Forum (WYEF)	Libya
181.	Plate-Forme Nationale des Organisations de la Société Civile de Madagascar (PFNOSCM)	Madagascar
182.	Malawi Economic Justice Network (MEJN)	Malawi
183.	Consumers Association of Penang	Malaysia
184.	Friends of the Earth Malaysia/SAM	Malaysia
185.	Fédération des Syndicats du Secteur Public	Mali
186.	Reseau National d’Appui a la Prommotion de L’economie Sociale et Solidaire du Mali (RENAPESS MALI)	Mali
187.	Association Action pour le Traitement des malades du Cœur (ACTC)	Mauritania
188.	Mauritanian Network for Social Action / Réseau Mauritanien Pour L’Action Sociale	Mauritania
189.	Center for Alternative Research and Studies (CARES)	Mauritius
190.	Confederation of Free Trade Unions	Mauritius
191.	Federation of Democratic Labour Unions	Mauritius
192.	General Workers Federation	Mauritius
193.	Government Services Employees Association	Mauritius
194.	Local Authorities Employees Union	Mauritius
195.	Mauritius Trade Union Congress (MTUC)	Mauritius
196.	Migration and Sustainable Development Alliance	Mauritius
197.	Resistance & Alternative	Mauritius
198.	State and Other Employees Federation	Mauritius
199.	Asociación Nacional de Industriales de Transformación (ANIT)	Mexico
200.	Bia´lii, Asesoría e Investigación, A.C.	Mexico
201.	Centro de Promoción y Educación Profesional “Vasco de Quiorga”	Mexico
202.	Fundacion Mexicana para la Planeacion Familiar, AC (MEXFAM)	Mexico
203.	Grupo Tacuba	Mexico
204.	Otros Mundos Chiapas	Mexico
205.	Procesos Integrales para la Autogestión de los Pueblos	Mexico
206.	Red Mexicana de Acción frente al Libre Comercio (RMALC)	Mexico
207.	Sindicato Único de Trabajadores del Gobierno de la Ciudad de México	Mexico
208.	Unión Popular Valle Gómez, A.C.	Mexico
209.	All Nepal Peasants’ Federation	Nepal
210.	Greater Active Reconstruction & Justice Action Network-Nepal (GARJAN-Nepal)	Nepal
211.	Health Professional Association of Nepal (HEPON)	Nepal
212.	Nepal Civil Services Employees Union Association (NECSEUA)	Nepal
213.	Nepal Film Workers Union (NFWU)	Nepal
214.	Union of Public Services in Nepal (UPSIN)	Nepal
215.	Both ENDS	Netherlands
216.	It’s Our Future NZ	New Zealand
217.	New Zealand Council of Trade Unions Te Kauae Kaimahi	New Zealand
218.	New Zealand Public Service Association	New Zealand
219.	Central de Trabajadores de la Salud (Fetsalud Granada)	Nicaragua
220.	Centro de los Derechos del Campesino (CEDECAM)	Nicaragua
221.	Red de Organizaciones Sociales de Managua	Nicaragua
222.	Reseau des Organisations de Developpement et Associations de Defense de Droits de L’Homme et de la Democratie (RODADDHD)	Niger
223.	Centre for Human Rights and Climate Change Research	Nigeria
224.	Labour, Health and Human Rights Development Centre	Nigeria
225.	National Association of Nigerian Traders (NANTS)	Nigeria
226.	Folkeaksjonen mot TISA	Norway
227.	All Pakistan Labour Federation (APLF)	Pakistan
228.	Civil Society Support Program (CSSP)	Pakistan
229.	NOOR Pakistan	Pakistan
230.	Sustainable Development Vision (SDV)	Pakistan
231.	Social and Economic Policies Monitor (Al Marsad)	Palestine
232.	Catedratico Universitario	Panama
233.	Colectivo Voces Ecológicas (COVEC)	Panama
234.	Friends of the Earth/Papua New Guinea	Papua New Guinea
235.	TEDIC	Paraguay
236.	Confederación General de Trabajadores del Perú (CGTP)	Peru
237.	Federación Nacional de Trabajadores de Agua Potable y Alcantarillado del Perú (FENTAP)	Peru
238.	Grupo Red de Economia Solidaria del Peru (GRESP)	Peru
239.	Instituto para el Desarrollo y la Paz Amazónica	Peru
240.	Red Peruana de Comercio Justo y Consumo Ético	Peru
241.	Red Uniendo Manos	Peru
242.	Alliance of Filipino Workers	Philippines
243.	Initiatives for Dialogue and Empowerment through Alternative Legal Services (IDEALS)	Philippines
244.	Philippine Alliance of Human Rights Advocates (PAHRA)	Philippines
245.	Public Services Labor Independent Confederation (PSLINK)	Philippines
246.	Fundacja Strefa Zieleni	Poland
247.	Associação Sindical dos Profissionais da Inspeção Tributária e Aduaneira (APIT)	Portugal
248.	Ole Siosiomaga Society Incorporated (OLSSI)	Samoa
249.	Coalition Nationale Non aux APE	Senegal
250.	Front Anti APE Anti CFA	Senegal
251.	Pan Africain Association for Literacy and Adult Education (PAALAE)	Senegal
252.	Personnels Civils des Armées des Services de Sécurité Publics Privés et Assimilés	Senegal
253.	International-Lawyers.Org	Sierra Leone
254.	Institute for Economic Research on Innovation	South Africa
255.	National Public Service Workers Union	South Africa
256.	Community Empowerment for Progress Organization (CEPO)	South Sudan
257.	Amigos de la Tierra España	Spain
258.	WDGpa – World Democratic Governance project association, Catalunya	Spain
259.	Unión Universal Desarrollo Solidario	Spain
260.	We Women Lanka Network	Sri Lanka
261.	Public Service Union	St Vincent and the Grenadines
262.	Gender Studies Centre	Sudan
263.	Alliance Sud	Switzerland
264.	Association citoyenne pour la défense des usagers du service public (ACIDUS)	Switzerland
265.	Association for Proper Internet Governance	Switzerland
266.	Bread for All	Switzerland
267.	Coalition Suisse pour la Diversité Culturelle	Switzerland
268.	Fastenopfer	Switzerland
269.	Public Eye	Switzerland
270.	VPOD Switzerland, the trade union for public services	Switzerland
271.	Governance Links Tanzania	Tanzania
272.	Tanzania Trade and Economic Justice Forum (TTEJF)	Tanzania
273.	La’o Hamutuk – Timor-Leste Institute for Development Monitoring and Analysis	Timor-Leste
274.	Les Amis de la Terre-Togo	Togo
275.	Ligue des Consommateurs du Togo (LCT)	Togo
276.	National Union of Government and Federated Workers, Trinidad and Tobago	Trinidad & Tobago
277.	Public Services Association of Trinidad and Tobago	Trinidad & Tobago
278.	Tunisian Forum for Economic and Social Rights / Forum Tunisien Pour les Droits Economiques et Sociaux	Tunisia
279.	Citizens Platform for Democracy and Accountability	Uganda
280.	Southern and Eastern African Trade Information and Negotiations Institute (SEATINI)	Uganda
281.	Global Justice Now!	United Kingdom
282.	GMB trade union	United Kingdom
283.	National Justice and Peace Network UK (England & Wales)	United Kingdom
284.	Trade Justice Movement	United Kingdom
285.	UNISON	United Kingdom
286.	American Federation of Teachers	United States
287.	Global Policy Forum (GPF)	United States/ Germany
288.	Global Exchange	United States
289.	Local Futures	United States
290.	Sisters of Charity Federation	United States
291.	Society of Catholic Medical Missionaries	United States
292.	Washington Fair Trade Coalition	United States
293.	Federación de Funcionarios de Obras Sanitarias del Estado	Uruguay
294.	Instituto del Tercer Mundo	Uruguay
295.	REDES-Amigos de la Tierra Uruguay	Uruguay
296.	Red de Economistas del Uruguay (REDIU)	Uruguay
297.	Coalición de Tendencias Clasistas (CTC-VZLA)	Venezuela
298.	Equipo de Formacion, Informacion y Publicaciones (EFIP)	Venezuela
299.	Zambia Council for Social Development (ZCSD)	Zambia
300.	Southern and Eastern African Trade Information and Negotiations Institute (SEATINI-Zimbabwe)	Zimbabwe