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

H.E. Ambassador Lundeg Purevsuren
3; 4; 5 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

47.   In July, Ukraine has submitted its responses to the Checklist of questions related to the review of the provisions of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement using the recently developed e-TRIPS online system, which we found user friendly. 48.   We would like to make a brief presentation on the substance of those answers. In particular, the protection of intellectual property rights to plant varieties in Ukraine is provided under the Law "On Protection of Plant Variety Rights". This Law stipulates criteria of variety suitability for the acquisition of intellectual property rights, the procedure for acquiring protection, the duration of protection and enforcement of the rights. 49.   Thus, Ukraine provides for the protection of plant varieties by a sui generis system set out in national legislation. 50.   Patent protection is granted for products such as micro-organism strains, plant or animal cells culture etc., as well as for non-biological and microbiological processes for the production of plants and animals according to the Law of Ukraine "On Protection of Rights to Inventions and Utility Models", if they meet requirements for patentability. 51.   We believe that this review exercise has the potential to enhance the transparency of domestic systems for the protection of plant varieties and we invite WTO Members to have a look at Ukraine's answers as contained in document IP/C/W/125/Add.26 for further detail. 52.   We also would like to encourage other WTO Members to provide or update their answers to the relevant questionnaires related to the Review of the Provisions of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement.

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, agenda items 3, 4 and 5 be addressed together. He noted that, Ukraine had recently submitted its responses to the List of Questions on Article 27.3(b), which had been circulated in document IP/C/W/125/Add.26. He invited Ukraine to introduce its submission.
15.   The representative of Ukraine took the floor.
16.   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.
17.   He noted that two longstanding procedural issues under these items had 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.
18.   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 resolve them.
19.   The representatives of South Africa; Bangladesh; India; Ecuador; Indonesia; the Plurinational State of Bolivia; Zimbabwe; Brazil; Nigeria; Australia; Thailand; Chile; China; Canada; Japan; Switzerland; and the United States of America took the floor.
20.   The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to the matters at its next meeting.
IP/C/M/93, IP/C/M/93/Add.1