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

H.E. Ambassador Lundeg Purevsuren
4; 5; 6 REVIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF ARTICLE 27.3(B); RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE TRIPS AGREEMENT AND THE CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY; PROTECTION OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE AND FOLKLORE

123.   Recalling South Africa's statement delivered at the previous TRIPS Council meeting, South Africa remains committed to upholding its obligations under the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization. The National Environmental Management: Biodiversity Act [No 10, 2004], includes provisions that relate to access and benefit sharing (ABS). Furthermore, the disclosure of the use of traditional knowledge or biological resource in a patent application is a mandatory requirement in terms of Sections 30 (3a) of the Patents Act No. 37 of 1952 as amended in 2005. 124.   South Africa recently conducted a workshop on Indigenous Knowledge Systems and Intellectual Property. The workshop was successfully co-hosted by the Department of Science and Technology and Department of International Relations and Cooperation. Said workshop served as an opportunity for participating African States to present their legislative frameworks on indigenous knowledge, and for South Africa to profile its provincial IKS systems, national recordal system and national IK Management System. However, despite the necessary legislation and systems established by South Africa to protect IK and GR, the unlawful use of biological resources and traditional knowledge continues to be perpetuated through misappropriation and biopiracy. South Africa advances its position that these issues are best addressed and regulated within the ambit of the TRIPS Agreement. 125.   In respect of procedural issues, South Africa once again calls on the Secretariat to update the three factual notes contained in documents IP/C/W/368/Rev.1, IP/C/W/369/Rev.1 and IP/C/W/370/Rev.1. We further reiterate our support for a briefing by the CBD Secretariat on the Nagoya Protocol and subsequent developments.

The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matters at its next meeting.
18.   The Chair proposed that, following past practice, agenda items 4, 5 and 6 be addressed together. He noted that there had been important developments in these areas in many WTO Members, which had not been shared with the Council. Until recently, only 25 Members had responded to the List of Questions on Article 27.3(b), and the last response dated from 2003. Mexico had recently submitted its responses, which had been circulated in document IP/C/W/125/Add.25. He invited Mexico to introduce its submission.
19.   The representative of Mexico took the floor.
20.   The Chair encouraged delegations to submit responses to the List of Questions or update their previous responses; as well as notify any relevant changes in legislation.
21.   He noted that two longstanding procedural issues under these items have been discussed extensively on the record, at every regular meeting of the Council for almost nine years:
a. First, the suggestion for the Secretariat to update the three factual notes on the Council's discussions on the TRIPS and CBD and related items; these notes were initially prepared in 2002 and last updated in 2006; and
b. Second, the request to invite the CBD Secretariat to brief the Council on the Nagoya Protocol to the CBD, initially proposed in October 2010.
22.   The positions on these issues were well-known and already extensively recorded in the Council minutes. In addressing these procedural questions, he encouraged delegations to focus on suggestions as to how to make resolve them.
23.   The representatives of Mexico; Benin, on behalf of the LDC Group; Switzerland; the Plurinational State of Bolivia; Nigeria; Bangladesh; Japan; Brazil; Indonesia; China; India, New Zealand; South Africa; Canada; Australia; the Russian Federation; and the United States of America took the floor.
24.   The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matters at its next meeting.
IP/C/M/92, IP/C/M/92/Add.1, IP/C/M/92/Corr.1