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

H.E. Ambassador Dr. Lansana GBERIE
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
80.   I would like to associate my delegation with the statements made by previous speakers especially the statement made by Tanzania on behalf of the African Group. Our position on the issue under consideration is well-known, and it does not need to be re-stated. However, we wish on this occasion to express our concern over the impasse that characterizes the triplets. The review of the provisions of Article 27.3(b) has been a long-standing item on the agenda of this Council, however, still without any substantial progress. Based on the standards of morality and ethics we cannot support patentability of life forms for trade and trade-related gain, and these should not be subject to patent protection. The same thing it is important to maintain the flexibility on the forms of a sui generis regime developed for the protection of plant varieties based on individual country systems and requirements. This will contribute towards improving food security situations of indigenous people by ensuring that their inventions are protected and access to seeds is guaranteed. 81.   The protection of biological resources, traditional knowledge and folklore is an important development issue for Egypt. We consider that protection of biological resources, traditional knowledge and folklore is critical for the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement. Biodiversity is a core issue and an important source of livelihood for the majority of populations living in most of our countries. We still maintain our position that disclosure in the patent application of country of origin of the genetic resource and the associated traditional knowledge used in the invention is the only effective way to move forward to ensure proper sharing of benefits arriving from their utilisation. 82.   We support the call for inserting a mandatory requirement in the TRIPS Agreement for a patent applicant to provide information concerning prior informed consent and fair and equitable access and benefit-sharing. The TRIPS Agreement should not overlook the sovereign rights of nations over their biological resources, nor should it deprive those nations of enjoying their economic advantages.
The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to these matters at its next meeting.
20. The Chair proposed to address these three agenda items together. He recalled that one tool for the review under item 4 was the information provided by Members in response to lists of questions on Article 27.3(b). He said that the Annual Report on Notifications and other Information Flows that had been introduced by the Secretariat at the Council's last meeting illustrated that responses to that checklist had been rather sparse recently. So far, only 28 Members had responded to the lists of questions on Article 27.3(b), with Saudi Arabia being the most recent Member to submit responses. The Chair thus encouraged Members to submit responses to these checklists, and to update their previous submissions if they were out of date, noting that the e-TRIPS Submission System provided an easy and convenient online tool for drafting and submitting responses.
21. The Chair indicated two long-standing procedural issues which had been discussed extensively on the record, at every regular meeting of the Council for almost ten years. The first one was the suggestion for the Secretariat to update 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. The second was 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 Chair noted that the delegations' positions on these issues were well-known and had already extensively recorded in the Council's minutes and therefore suggested that delegations focus their interventions on suggestions on how to resolve differences and make progress on substantive issues.
23. The representatives of India; Tanzania, on behalf of the African Group; Bangladesh; Brazil; South Africa; Indonesia; Sri Lanka; Egypt; Peru; the United States; Canada; China; Japan; and Chile took the floor.
24. The Council took note of the statements made and agreed to revert to these matters at its next meeting.
IP/C/M/105, IP/C/M/105/Add.1, IP/C/M/105/Corr.1