93. The representative of Brazil supported Peru's submission IP/C/W/484 and said that, although the Doha Round had been suspended, the issue of the relationship between the Agreement and the CBD was still of the utmost importance and should be given priority in the TRIPS Council in accordance with the mandate given by Ministers. He said that, in addition to the mandate contained in paragraph 12 of the Doha Ministerial Declaration, the Council had another mandate stemming from paragraph 19, which instructed the Council to continue its work regarding the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD and the protection of traditional knowledge and folklore, which should be guided by the objectives and principles set out in Articles 7 and 8 of the Agreement and take fully into account the development dimension. He recalled the content of Article 7 and Article 8 of the Agreement. He said that Members should move forward with the debate on the amendment of the Agreement for a disclosure requirement. The proposal for the amendment of the Agreement sought to enhance the mutual supportiveness of the Agreement and the CBD. The amendment would be the most practical and efficient means of endowing the patent system with an instrument to deal with the issues of misappropriation and biopiracy. It would also facilitate tracking illegitimate use of genetic resources or traditional knowledge in patented inventions. The patent system needed to address the issue of legitimacy and should not undermine the pursuit of the objectives of the CBD by granting patents to the invention that had been made through illegitimate access to traditional knowledge and genetic resources.
94. He recalled that his delegation, on behalf of the co-sponsors of document IP/C/W/474, had provided responses to certain questions raised by other Members on the disclosure proposal at the last TRIPS Council meeting, which had been circulated as document IP/C/W/475. This document responded to some questions raised by the United States in its submission IP/C/W/469. In order to have a concrete and useful debate on this issue, he said that the Council should focus its discussion on the amendment proposal. He noted that many of the US concerns and questions had been given an adequate response or were self-evident. In some cases they did not specifically address the amendment proposal as such but were more theoretical in nature. Therefore, he would encourage delegations to raise more specific questions on the amendment proposal to which he would like to provide further information after coordinating with the other co-sponsors.
