77. The representative of Japan said that his delegation needed more time to examine the indicative list proposed by the Chairperson, partially because some of the items seemed to be outside the scope of Article 27.3(b). As regards the relationship between the CBD and the TRIPS Agreement, he noted that the CBD and the TRIPS Agreement had different perspectives which were complementary and mutually supportive. Therefore, they should be implemented and deliberated in separate frameworks. Accordingly, his delegation was of the view that it was premature to address CBD-related issues in depth within the framework of the TRIPS Agreement. As regards issues related to traditional knowledge, the concept of the traditional knowledge of local and indigenous communities was not yet clearly defined and its relation with intellectual property was not clear. Therefore, possible inclusion of the protection of the traditional knowledge in the TRIPS Agreement had not yet reached a suitable stage for discussion in the TRIPS context. Instead, he suggested that the Council should wait for the ongoing work done by other international fora, such as WIPO and the FAO.
