H.E. Ambassador Lundeg Purevsuren

Ecuador

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

72.   Ecuador reaffirms its commitment to encouraging the strategic regulation of intellectual property as a useful tool for promoting research and innovation balanced with the full exercise of other rights, such as the protection of all life forms. 73.   Regarding such protection, Ecuador reiterates its appeal to the Council to reflect on the importance of prohibiting patents on all life forms or parts thereof in order to avoid endangering or negatively affecting them, since they should not be considered tradeable goods subject to inventions and, therefore, patents. 74.   We believe that a balanced and fair system will only be possible if we include specific issues in our discussions, in accordance with sovereign regulation to ensure the effective protection of genetic resources, traditional knowledge and traditional cultural expressions. 75.   In this regard, the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity are related and complement each other. We believe it is important that the two are mutually supportive in their objectives. 76.   Accordingly, disclosure of origin and source, prior informed consent and the equitable sharing of benefits should, as unattachable, imprescriptible and inalienable collective rights, be taken into account. 77.   Lastly, we reiterate our request that the Secretariat update the factual notes on previous topics, given that the last compilation of the ideas discussed was produced in 2006. 78.   We highlight the fact that this update will provide greater clarity on the issues discussed without prejudice to each Member's position, and, in this way, advance the work of this Council.

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