2.22 The outcome of Uruguay`s round of negotiations has been commonly referred to as a “great agreement” – an agreement between developed and developing countries that has agreed to the inclusion of services in the GATT in exchange for concessions to reduce the protection of agriculture in developed countries. In June 2008, Canadian academic Michael Geist, who wrote for Copyright News, argued that “Government Should Lift Veil on ACTA Secrecy” and noted that ACTA was in the shadows before documents were leaked on the Internet. The Toronto Star`s coverage of the documents “has generated widespread opposition as Canadians worry about the prospect of a trade agreement that could lead to invasive searches of personal computers and increased surveillance of online activities.” Geist argued that the public disclosure of the proposed ActA contract “could put an end to concerns about border guards looking for iPods” and that it could “bring attention to other important concerns, including increased filtering of content by Internet service providers, increased responsibility for websites that refer to allegedly offensive content, and a decrease in privacy.” The spirit also argued that greater transparency would lead to a more inclusive process and stressed that the ACTA negotiations had excluded both civil society groups and developing countries. Geist said that “reports indicate that trade negotiators were forced to sign confidentiality agreements for fear that the provisions of the treaty were disclosed to the public.” He argued that “cooperation between all parties involved in the fight against counterfeiting” was needed and that an “effective strategy requires broader participation and regular feedback mechanisms.” [102] The Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACAC) was a multilateral treaty establishing international standards for the application of intellectual property rights. The agreement aims to create an international legal framework for combating counterfeiting, generic medicines and copyright infringement on the internet and would create a new governing body outside existing forums, such as the World Trade Organization, the World Intellectual Property Organization and the United Nations. This article takes up the arguments, debates and controversies that led to the European Parliament`s rejection of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACAC) and assesses the implications for the European Union of the future review of international agreements on intellectual property rights. The article repeats these tasks in four phases. Firstly, it examines how Parliament was able, for the first time, to exercise its veto over a draft international agreement negotiated by the Commission on behalf of the EU as part of the procedure for approving the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFUE). Second, it examines ACTA`s rationale for why the agreement was deemed necessary, given that other international forums have been set up to address the application of intellectual property. Thirdly, the article reflects the reasons why ACTA has become so controversial that it has been at the centre of unprecedented public concern within the EU and its Member States, paying particular attention to the lack of transparency in the negotiation process, the fear that fundamental rights and freedoms in the EU will be undermined by the provisions of ACTA and fears that the agreement is in conflict with the EU acquis and the agreement on WTO TRIPS.