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
79.   Our delegation attaches great importance to the negotiation of the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the Convention on Biological Diversity, as well as the protection of traditional knowledge and folklore. We reiterate our position that Article 27.3(b) and Article 29 of the TRIPS Agreement do not provide any legal obligation for Members to take all necessary measures for fair and equitable sharing of benefits as required by the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol. This legal lacuna provides room for misappropriation and misuse of genetic resources and traditional knowledge that, in the end, defeats the purpose and objective of the CBD and the Nagoya Protocol. 80.   Substantive discussions of this issue should not be delayed simply because it is being negotiated in other fora, such as WIPO. The discussions in this Council should reinforce what has already been agreed at the multilateral level, such as the CBD, and should complement negotiations/discussions in other fora. We believe that parallel discussions will enhance effort and understanding in achieving a fair and balanced trading system with regard to intellectual property. 81.   Indonesia hence believes that it is timely for the Council to give simultaneous and adequate attention to address the issue towards a common goal to ensure that GRTKF are protected in an appropriate manner.
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