7. The Chairman suggested that the Council continue its past practice of addressing the three agenda items together on the basis of contributions by Members.
8. He recalled that, at the Council's meeting in March 2011, the Plurinational State of Bolivia had presented a paper further explaining its earlier proposal to amend the TRIPS Agreement to ban patents on life forms (document IP/C/W/554).
9. He also recalled that, at that meeting, Japan had made a presentation on the outcome of the tenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP10) to the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) held in Nagoya in October 2010. India and a number of other Members had still wished to hear from the CBD Secretariat on the outcome, and had reiterated their suggestion that it be invited to provide a briefing on a one-time basis.
10. As requested by the Council, he said that he had consulted with a number of Members on that suggestion. Those Members that had been in favour of that suggestion explained that they had felt that the CBD Secretariat would be best placed to give further in-depth information on the interpretation and implementation of the Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization (the Nagoya Protocol). However, some others had felt that the countries that had negotiated the Nagoya Protocol would themselves be best placed to discuss any specific issues relating to it.
11. In his consultations, Members had explored the idea that the CBD Secretariat would organize a side event in the margins of the Council's meeting. Some Members had considered that as a good option, but some others had felt that, without a formal link to the Council's work, such an event would not add value. There had been a proposal that, if a side event were to be organized, it should then result in a formal report to the Council, and that the CBD Secretariat would then be invited to a subsequent meeting of the Council. However, some Members had felt that Members themselves would be best placed to bring any issues arising from such an event to the Council.
12. He had also discussed with Members the suggestion El Salvador had made at the last meeting that the WIPO Secretariat be invited to brief the Council on the work of the WIPO Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC). The reason for that suggestion was merely to provide the opportunity for all delegations present, particularly the smaller delegations that did not cover work at WIPO, to have an update on proceedings in the IGC. However, some Members had not found it necessary to have such a briefing at the Council's present meeting, but rather thought that such a briefing might be more useful at the meeting of October 2011. Accordingly, the Council might wish to consider at its October meeting whether to invite WIPO Secretariat to speak on that matter.
