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

Ambassador D. Mwape (Zambia)
1 NEGOTIATION ON THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A MULTILATERAL SYSTEM OF NOTIFICATION AND REGISTRATION OF GEOGRAPHICAL INDICATIONS FOR WINES AND SPIRITS
1.99. The representative of Cuba said that the participation of Members in a notification and registration system must be voluntary because the mandate under TRIPS Article 23.4 referred to "those Members participating in the system" and not to all Members of the WTO. For Cuba, voluntary participation meant that Members who did not participate in the system did not have any obligation to consult the GI register. Nevertheless, non-participating Members could, if they so wished, consult the register. The simple act of consulting the register did not mean that the non- participating Member would be bound to apply any consequences or legal effects of presumption of extraterritorial nature. Such effects would imply that the non-participating Member had accepted, and committed itself, to consider a GI on the register as prima facie evidence that it was a GI under Article 22.1 of the TRIPS Agreement. Merely consulting the register also did not mean that the Member had to provide proof to the contrary to reverse the presumption if administrative or judicial decisions to grant or to reject a trademark or a geographical indication had not taken into account a geographical indication on the register. He said that the system could not violate the principle of territoriality. Therefore there was no obligation for Members' national authorities to automatically recognize GIs on the register as fulfilling the requirements of Article 22.1. The existence and functioning of the register could not imply that the burden of proof should be reversed, thus favouring the foreign applicant seeking protection of a GI. A principle and legal practice recognized in intellectual property and in the TRIPS Agreement was that applicants seeking protection for their trademarks and GIs in a country had to prove that they fulfilled the requirements for such protection under that country's domestic legislation. 1.100. He said that Cuba supported the proposed provisions on S&D, which should at least give developing countries the freedom to decide themselves on their participation in the system.
The Special Session took note of the statements made.
TN/IP/M/28