73. The representative of Switzerland said that Switzerland had implemented a patent regime which promoted the protection and patentability of inventions, particularly in the field of biotechnology, and thereby also made use of the flexibility provided by the TRIPS Agreement. The field of biotechnology held particular promises for mankind both in developing and developed countries. A precondition for the necessary investments in R&D of new biotechnological products was a reliable and effective patent and court system, among other critical factors such as overall favourable market conditions for companies.
74. Bearing in mind the close connection between adequate and effective patent protection, on one hand, and facilitating private and state enterprises to invest more means in the R&D of innovative products and services, on the other hand, Switzerland held the view that the review of Article 27.3(b) should not lead to any lowering of the level of patent protection for biotechnological inventions. Article 27.2 in conjunction with Article 27.3(b) already provided for both sufficient flexibility and some freedom to opt for the exclusion of certain inventions as precautionary measures that a national legislator could take - within the scope of the Agreement.
75. An initiative, which was intended to increase transparency and enhance legal certainty in the context of the patent application and granting process, was contained in submission TN/C/W/52 which Switzerland had co-sponsored. More than two thirds of Members proposed therein key modalities language for the three TRIPS issues. The requirement for disclosing the source of genetic resources and TK in patent applications was one of those three issues, besides the GI extension and GI register. He believed that such a requirement would be an adequate way to add legitimacy and promote a better understanding and acceptance of the benefits of the patent system.
