85. The representative of Chinese Taipei said that the flexibilities provided for in Article 27.3(b) allowed Members to implement relevant domestic provisions appropriately and to take into account their own needs and interests. Members were able to take advantage of those flexibilities to suit their particular unique domestic conditions. The review of Article 27.3(b) should not lead to any lowering of the level of patent protection for biotechnological inventions. She said that the TRIPS-CBD issue concerned a number of different stakeholders. On-going discussions and consultations should take those interests into consideration. The attempt to make a linkage between three TRIPS issues and to include them as part of the Single Undertaking was not helpful. Each issue should be discussed on its own merits.
