By John Weekes

December 4, 2025

One significant but easy step that Canada could take to help shore up the World Trade Organization (WTO) in these troubled times would be to resume its financial support for the Advisory Centre on WTO Law (ACWL).

The ACWL is a small but vital international organization in Geneva that provides legal advice and support to least developed and developing countries to participate effectively in the rules-based system of the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Canada took a leadership role in creating the centre and was a founding member when then-Minister of International Trade Pierre Pettigrew signed the Agreement Establishing the ACWL in 1999. Canada continued its active support through the Chretien and Harper governments until 2016, when the Trudeau government ceased financial support while continuing to praise the value of the organization.

Partnering with the 11 other developed-country members of the ACWL that provide most of the funding for the organization and its 39 developing country members, all of whom are staunch supporters of the WTO, makes eminent sense for Canada, particularly in the face of Donald Trump’s attacks on the global trading system. Canada’s share of the budget would be well under CAD 1 million per annum. Frankly, Canada’s failure to carry its weight is an embarrassment.

Canada is a strong supporter of the rules-based multilateral trading system and of the need for all its members, wealthy and not, to have access to its rights and obligations. These are challenging times for the WTO and the ACWL. Next March, the WTO will hold its 14th Ministerial Conference in Yaoundé, Cameroon. The main issue on the agenda will be WTO reform, as members try to revitalize the organization.

Given the source and nature of the ongoing assaults against a global trading status quo that has been a stabilizing force and the economic circulatory system of the rules-based international order, it may be tempting to think all the WTO’s problems are existential. To frame the crisis that way, however, is to both grant disproportionate credit to those who make superficial judgements, and to discount the role the WTO plays in the economic lives of least developed and developing countries.

In other words, the accessibility and inclusivity of the system is an important reform issue. As Canada has stated in the WTO’s General Council, “all work at the WTO must be done in a way that is inclusive, transparent, and that enables the full, effective, and equal participation of all Members”.  In these circumstances, renewing Canada’s financial support to the ACWL would be a valuable, cost-effective way to show Canada’s leadership and its commitment to WTO reform at the ministerial conference.

The ACWL and its work

The ACWL evolved in response to concerns expressed shortly after the WTO was created in 1995 that many developing and  least developed countries lacked the technical legal expertise to take full advantage of the development opportunities offered by their participation in the increasingly complex WTO system.

A group of developed and developing countries, including Canada, realized the viability of the rules-based system depended on ensuring that all developing countries and LDCs could have equal access to the system. These countries decided that the best option was to create a small international organization that would be independent of the WTO.

It would be funded mainly by developed countries that were willing to do so and, as an independent entity, would be free to provide expert advice outside of the legal constraints faced by the WTO Secretariat. This was the first time the principle that the acceptability of a system of justice to all that are subject to it depends on equal access to that system was applied in international law.

Since it began operations in 2001, the ACWL has been an extraordinary success. It has enabled developing countries to participate in more than 70 WTO disputes — an impressive 20 per cent of all WTO disputes in that time. Moreover, the ACWL provides an average of 200 legal opinions each year to developing and least developed countries at their request (over 4000 in total).

These legal opinions enable countries to improve their compliance with their WTO obligations, to participate more effectively in WTO negotiations and committees, and to protect market access for their exports to other WTO members. These legal opinions respect attorney-client privilege, but I do know that in many cases, these opinions have resulted in developing country members taking decisions to modify legislation they were considering in order to comply with their WTO obligations.

Finally, the ACWL runs extensive training programmes in WTO law both for delegates of developing and least developed countries in Geneva and for officials in their capitals (usually virtually).

Therefore, the ACWL’s services continue to play an important role in building confidence among developing and least developed countries that they are and will continue to be major beneficiaries of the WTO system. In the current struggle to protect the integrity of the WTO and to strengthen it to meet new challenges, the enthusiastic support of these members will be crucial.

Over the years, the ACWL has built a reputation for excellence and receives consistently positive reviews from users. I served on the ACWL’s independent Management Board for over 20 years and was very impressed by how hard the ACWL’s small, dedicated team of 12 lawyers worked to fulfil its mandate.

At the WTO’s 13th Ministerial Conference in Abu Dhabi in 2024, the WTO Director-General, Dr. Ngozi Okonjo-Iweala paid tribute paid tributeto the work of the ACWL, saying that if the ACWL did not already exist, WTO Members would be trying to create it. She went on to say that “making WTO dispute settlement accessible to all is a priority for members in the ongoing discussions on reforming the dispute settlement system. In parallel to these efforts, it would be ironic, and more importantly unwise, if we fail to ensure sustainable funding for the ACWL — a mechanism that has done so much to make dispute settlement more accessible to all”.

Canada’s support for WTO Reform

Canada has been at the forefront of recent efforts to reform the WTO, including its dispute settlement system, which Canada sees as a cornerstone of the WTO system. In the WTO Reform discussions, members recently “reaffirmed that WTO must remain Member-driven, transparent, and inclusive” and that “an accessible, fair, and cost-effective dispute resolution system is essential”.

As noted, the inclusivity and accessibility of the WTO are important issues in the WTO reform process. Canada and other governments have long seen the ACWL as the best means of ensuring an accessible and fair dispute settlement system.

Canada’s membership and continued financial support of the ACWL should be seen as integral to Canada’s commitment to the multilateral trading system and its leadership in the WTO reform process. One reason for the lack of Canadian support during the Trudeau years was that the government insisted that the appropriate way to fund its contribution to the ACWL was through the foreign development aid envelope. Unfortunately, the ACWL did not fit the traditional criteria for bilateral development projects. In my view, it is a mistake for Canada to think of its support for the ACWL as traditional foreign aid.

What is really at issue is support for the multilateral trading system on which Canada’s own economy is heavily dependent. Fundamental Canadian interests are advanced when the work of the ACWL encourages more developing countries to realize just how valuable the WTO system is for them.

It is important to provide a brief explanation about how the ACWL is financed. In practice, the ACWL’s budget is financed mostly through voluntary contributions from its 12 donor developed country members. The General Assembly of the ACWL’s members has periodically reviewed the ACWL’s financial needs to arrive at a funding target that will provide a predictable framework that allows the ACWL to plan its activities and staffing requirements.

As the ACWL is a public good, the general expectation is that each country’s contribution will be roughly the same and the total will meet the target established. Unfortunately, Canada’s failure to play its role is a major factor in what has become a chronic underfunding of the ACWL. If not rectified in the next couple of years, this shortfall will have serious negative consequences for the viability of the organization.

Based on current needs, Canada’s annual support should be in the order of CAD 700,000 (the ACWL’s annual budget is CAD 8.5 million). Canada’s developed country partners in the ACWL – the Nordics, Germany, Ireland, the Netherlands, the UK, and Australia, have been carrying the weight. These countries must wonder why Canada continues to express support for the ACWL and participate in its governance, even though it stopped making financial contributions almost a decade ago.

Moving Forward

An announcement of renewed support for the ACWL at the WTO’s Ministerial Conference in Yaoundé in March would be an excellent way for Canada to demonstrate its commitment to WTO reform and to the accessibility of the rules-based multilateral trading system. This act would be very much appreciated by the other 50 Members of the ACWL, as well as by the 43 least developed countries automatically entitled to receive the services of the ACWL. It would also not go unnoticed by other members of the WTO family and NGOs that take an interest in its activities.

For reasons of both substance and optics, it would be in Canada’s own interest to enable the ACWL to move forward on a more solid footing.

John Weekes, who was Canada’s chief negotiator for the original NAFTA and ambassador to the WTO, is a member of the Expert Group on Canada-U.S. Relations, and a fellow of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute. He was a member of the Management Board of the ACWL for over 20 years.