H.E. Ambassador Dr Walter Werner

United States of America

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

84.   Regarding genetic resources, traditional knowledge and folklore, we continue to believe that WIPO serves as the best forum to address these issues. 85.   The WIPO IGC is looking at addressing unresolved issues and working on a common understanding of core issues, using an evidence-based approach and examples of national experiences. 86.   We take note that the WIPO General Assembly has agreed upon the renewal of the mandate of the WIPO Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (the IGC) for the 2018-2019 biennium, as well as the work plan for the IGC for the biennium, and will be meeting soon to discuss these issues. 87.   The United States will continue to engage in technical discussions at WIPO's IGC and looks forward to hearing more from the demandeurs regarding data supporting their position on this issue. 88.   With respect to the various requests made today, the United States is not in a position to support these requests, but remains open to discussions, including bilaterally with delegations in between and at the margins of TRIPS Council meetings.

16.   The Chair said that, as had already been noted during previous meetings, WTO Members had seen important developments in this area over the last decade. However, they had not shared information on those developments with the TRIPS Council. He believed that such information would enrich discussions. The Council had agreed on an Illustrative List of Questions (IP/C/W/122), which served as the basis for the review of on Article 27.3(b). However, only a minority of Members had provided responses; and there had been no response or updates since 2003. Similar gaps were also apparent with regard to Members' obligations under Article 63.2, as important legislative developments had not been notified to the TRIPS Council. He encouraged delegations to submit or update responses and to notify relevant laws and regulations to the TRIPS Council.
17.   The Chair noted that there were also two long-standing procedural issues which have been discussed for many years:
a. The suggestion made in November 2012 that the Secretariat update the three factual notes on the Council's previous discussions on the TRIPS and CBD and related items; these notes had been initially prepared in 2002 and last updated in 2006; and

b. The request that the CBD Secretariat be invited to brief the Council on the Nagoya Protocol to the CBD, initially proposed in October 2010.
18.   The Chair reported that there had been no developments on these procedural issues, during the informal consultation that had taken place the previous week. He invited delegations to share their suggestions on how to make progress.
19.   The representatives of India; Ecuador; South Africa; Brazil; Benin, on behalf of the LDC Group; the United States; Bangladesh; Japan; Switzerland; Australia; the Republic of Korea; Canada; China; and Indonesia took the floor.
20.   The Chair encouraged Members to have further discussions to resolve the outstanding procedural issues, and said that he stood ready to assist in the consultations.
21.   The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matters at its next meeting.

IP/C/M/89, IP/C/M/89/Add.1