Minutes - TRIPS Council - View details of the intervention/statement

H.E. Ambassador Dr. Walter Werner
5   PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE
58.   Under these triplet agenda items, the position of Bangladesh, as well as that of the LDC Group, is well-known. Although there is no change in it, I would like to reiterate our position for the sake of record. 59.   On the issue of the Review of the Provisions of Article 27.3(b), my delegation does not support the patenting of life forms comprising plants and animals. We call for the review of this Article in order to protect developing countries and LDCs from the negative effects of this provision on the key sectors that affect their livelihood, such as agriculture, health, food and climate change. This would help ensure, inter alia, food security and preserve the integrity of rural and local communities. Patenting of life forms at a multilateral level should be prohibited. 60.   On the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, we hold that States have the right and duty to protect their traditional knowledge and genetic resources. There is, therefore, a need to amend the TRIPS Agreement with a view to requiring applicants of patent relating to biological materials to provide information on the source and country of origin of biological resources and traditional knowledge used in the invention. 61.   In addition, applicants must show evidence of prior informed consent from, and benefit sharing arrangements with, the authorities and/or persons under the relevant national regime. This disclosure requirement, which is consistent with the transparency principle established in the multilateral trading system, will help to reduce the number of erroneous patents and biopiracy. 62.   We believe that traditional knowledge should receive legal recognition as its protection could as well contribute significantly to the achievement of development goals.
The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matters at its next meeting.
14.   The Chair proposed that, following past practice, the three agenda items would be addressed together. Members had seen important developments in these areas, over the last decade. However, information on those developments had not been shared with the TRIPS Council. For example, the Review of Article 27.3(b) was based on an Illustrative List of Questions agreed by the Council. To date, only 25 Members had submitted responses to that list and there had been no responses or updates since 2003. Similarly, there had been no notifications of domestic mechanisms to protect genetic resources and traditional knowledge under Article 63.2 TRIPS. He encouraged delegations to submit or update responses and to notify relevant laws and regulations to the TRIPS Council. This would definitively facilitate and enrich the discussions. He recalled that there had been no new developments on two long-standing procedural issues, namely:
a. The suggestion, first made in November 2012, that the Secretariat update the three factual notes on the Council's previous discussions on TRIPS/CBD and related items; and
b. The proposal, initially submitted in October 2010, that the CBD Secretariat be invited to brief the Council on the Nagoya Protocol to the CBD.
15.   The representatives of India, Egypt, China, Brazil, Bangladesh, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Ecuador, Chinese Taipei, Chile, South Africa, Indonesia, Canada, Thailand, Australia, Japan, the United States of America, and Switzerland took the floor.
16.   The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matters at its next meeting.
IP/C/M/90, IP/C/M/90/Add.1