WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/14
page 87
WIPO / / EWIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/14
ORIGINAL: English
DATE: April 14, 2004
WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION
GENEVA
intergovernmental committee on
intellectual property and genetic resources,
traditional knowledge and folklore
Sixth Session
Geneva, March 15 to 19, 2004
REPORT
Prepared by the Secretariat
INTRODUCTION
Convened by the Director General of WIPO in accordance with the decision of the WIPO General Assembly at its thirtieth session (document WO/GA/30/8, paragraphs 94
and 95) to extend a revised mandate, the Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (“the Committee”) held its sixth session in Geneva, from March15to19,2004.
The following States were represented: Algeria, Argentina, Armenia, Australia, Austria, Barbados, Belgium, Benin, Bolivia, Botswana, Brazil, Bulgaria, Cambodia, Cameroon, Canada, Chad, China, Colombia, Comoros, Congo, Costa Rica, Côte d’Ivoire, Croatia, CzechRepublic, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Ecuador, Egypt, El Salvador, Eritrea, Ethiopia, Fiji, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Guatemala, Guinea, Haiti, HolySee, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Iran (Islamic Republic of), Ireland, Italy, Japan, Jordan, Kenya, Kiribati, Kyrgyzstan, Latvia, Liberia, LibyanArabJamahiriya, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Madagascar, Malaysia, Mali, Malta, Mexico, Mongolia, Morocco, Myanmar, Namibia, Netherlands, New Zealand, Niger, Nigeria, Norway, Oman, Panama, Pakistan, Peru, Philippines, Portugal, Republic of Korea, Romania, RussianFederation, Rwanda, SaudiArabia, Senegal, SerbiaandMontenegro, Singapore, Slovakia, South Africa, Spain, SriLanka, Sudan, Sweden, Syrian Arab Republic, Swaziland, Switzerland, Tajikistan, Thailand, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Togo, Trinidad and Tobago, Tunisia, Turkey, Uganda, United Arab Emirates, United Kingdom, United States of America, Uruguay, Venezuela, Viet Nam, and Zambia (109). The European Commission was also represented as a member of the Committee.
The following intergovernmental organizations (‘IGOs’) took part as observers: United Nations (UN), African Regional Industrial Property Organization (ARIPO), African Union (AU), Arab Educational Cultural and Scientific Organization (ALECSO), AsianAfrican Legal Consultative Organization (AALCO), Commonwealth Secretariat, Economic Commission for Africa (ECA), European Patent Organization (EPO), Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), General Secretariat of the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States (ACP Group), International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV), League of Arab States (LAS), Pacific Islands Forum Secretariat, Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity (SCBD), South Centre, United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO), United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous Issues, and the World Trade Organization (WTO) (21).
Representatives of the following nongovernmental organizations (‘NGOs’) took part as observers: Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC); American Folklore Society; Assembly of First Nations; Association Tamaynut; Benelux Designs Office (BBDM); Berne Declaration; Brazilian Association of Intellectual Property (ABPI); Bureau des ressources génétiques (BRG); Call of the Earth (COE); Canadian Indigenous Biodiversity Network (CIBN); Center for International Environmental Law (CIEL); Central and Eastern European Copyright Alliance (CEECA); Centre de documentation, de recherche et d’information des peuples autochtones (DoCIP); Centre for International Industrial Property Studies (CEIPI); Consumer Project on Technology; Coordinadora de las Organizaciones indígenas de la Cuenca Amazónica (COICA); Creators’ Rights Alliance (CRA); CropLife International; Foundation for Aboriginal and Islander Research Action (FAIRA); Friends World Committee for Consultation and Quaker United Nations Office (FWCC); Fundación Nuestro Ambiente (FUNA); Genetic Resources Action International (GRAIN); Global Education and Environment Development (GEEDFoundation); Groupement européen des sociétés de gestion des droits des artistes interprètes (ARTIS GEIE; Health and Environment Program; Ibero-Latin-American Federation of Performers (FILAIE); Indian Council of South America (CISA); Indian Movement TupajAmaru Bolivia and Peru; Indigenous Peoples Program; Institute of Professional Representatives Before the European Patent Office(EPI); Institute of Social and Cultural Anthropology; International Association for the Protection of Industrial Property (AIPPI); International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development (ICTSD); International Chamber of Commerce (ICC); International Confederation of Music Publishers (ICMP); International Environmental Law Research Centre (IELRC); International Federation of Industrial Property Attorneys (FICPI); International Federation of Musicians (FIM); International Federation of Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Associations (IFPMA); International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organizations (IFRRO); International Indian Treaty Council (IITC); International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED); International League of Competition Law (ILCL); International Plant Genetic Resources Institute (IPGRI); International Publishers Association (IPA); International Seed Federation (ISF); Inuit Circumpolar Conference (ICC); Kaska Dena Council (KDC); Max-Planck-Institute for Intellectual Property, Competition and Tax Law; Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People; National Aboriginal Health Organization (NAHO); Promotion des médecines traditionnelles (PROMETRA International); The Rockefeller Foundation; SAAMI Council; Third World Network (TWN); Union of National Radio and Television Organizations of Africa (URTNA); World Conservation Union (IUCN); World Federation of Culture Collections (WFCC); World Self Medication Industry (WSMI); and the World Trade Institute (60).
Discussions were based on the following documents and information papers prepared or distributed by the Secretariat of WIPO (‘the Secretariat’):
- “Draft Agenda” (document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/1 Prov.1),
- “Accreditation of Certain NonGovernmental Organizations” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/2),
(WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/2 Add),
- “Traditional Cultural Expressions/Expressions of Folklore: Legal and Policy Options” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/3),
- “Traditional Cultural Expressions: Defensive Protection Measures Related to Industrial Property Classification Tools” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/3 Add.),
- “Traditional Knowledge: Policy and Legal Options” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/4),
- “Genetic Resources: Draft Intellectual Property Guidelines for Access and
- Benefit–Sharing Contracts” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/5),
- “Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expressions: The International Dimension” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/6),
- “Update on LegalTechnical Assistance and CapacityBuilding Activities” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/7),
- “Defensive Protection Measures relating to Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Traditional Knowledge” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/8),
- “Genetic Resources and Patent Disclosure Requirements: Transmission of Technical Study to the Convention on Biological Diversity” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/9),
- “Participation of Indigenous and Local Communities” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/10),
- “Certain Decisions of the Seventh Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/11),
- “Submission by the African Group: Objectives, principles and elements of an international instrument, or instruments, on intellectual property in relation to genetic resources and on the protection of traditional knowledge and folklore” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/12), and
- “Certain Decisions of the Seventh Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biological Diversity” (WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/13).
The Secretariat noted the interventions made and recorded them on tape. This report summarizes the discussions and provides the essence of interventions, without reflecting all the observations made in detail nor necessarily following the chronological order of interventions.
AGENDA ITEM 1: OPENING OF THE SESSION
The session was opened by Mr. Francis Gurry, Deputy Director General of WIPO, who welcomed the participants on behalf of the Director General of WIPO, Dr. Kamil Idris.
AGENDA ITEM 2: ELECTION OF THE OFFICERS
The Committee reelected Mr.Henry Olsson (Sweden) as Chair, reelected Mr.Ahmed Aly Morsi (Egypt) as ViceChair and elected Mr.Tian Lipu as its ViceChair, each for one year, and in each case by acclamation. Mr. Antony Taubman (WIPO) acted as Secretary to the sixth session of the Committee.
AGENDA ITEM 3: ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA
The Agenda was submitted by the Chair, and adopted by the Committee. At the request of the African Group, wishing to stress the importance of the international dimension and to introduce the contents of document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/12, the Committee agreed to hear opening statements on agenda item8 (International Dimension) prior to taking up items 5, 6 and 7.
AGENDA ITEM 4: ACCREDITATION OF CERTAIN ORGANIZATIONS
Accreditation of certain nongovernmental organizations
At the invitation of the Chair, the Secretariat introduced documents WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/2 and WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/2 Add, which gave details of ten additional nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) that had requested adhoc observer status for the sessions of the Committee since its fifth session. The Committee unanimously approved accreditation of all the following organizations as adhoc observers: Australian Folklore Association Inc., Call of the Earth (COE), Federación Folklórica Departamental de La Paz, Foundation for Research and Support of Indigenous Peoples of Crimea, Indian Council of South America (CISA), Indigenous Peoples (Bethechilokono) of Saint Lucia Governing Council, BCG, La Diablada Juventud Tradicional “Union de Bordadores”, Third World Network (TWN), Unisféra International Centre, and Wara Instituto Indígena Brasileiro.
Participation of local and indigenous communities
The Secretariat introduced document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/10, drawing attention to various proposals for enhancing the participation of local and indigenous communities in the work of the Committee that had been initiated, the proposal for enhanced voluntary funding of representatives of such communities, and the ongoing development of proposals for a more formal Voluntary Fund to support such participation.
The Delegation of Egypt on behalf of the African Group reaffirmed its support for enhancing participation of indigenous and local communities in the work of the Committee and added that the participation of indigenous and local communities had enriched the discussions of the Committee with their contributions. It supported paragraph 17 of document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/10, noting that it contained pragmatic and concrete steps to enhance participation of local and indigenous communities, especially that of the creation of an informal consultative forum for indigenous representatives. The Delegation reiterated its support for the establishment of a voluntary fund in accordance with the approach taken in the United Nations in consultation with Member States through regional coordinators.
The Delegation of Ireland on behalf of the European Community, its Member States and the Acceding States stated that the involvement and participation of indigenous and local communities in the Committee and in all other work of WIPO on genetic resources (GR), traditional knowledge (TK) and folklore was of great importance and enhanced measures to facilitate cooperation should be undertaken. The Delegation welcomed the initiatives that had been taken since the fifth session of the Committee, including the organization of consultations and workshops at national, regional and international level and the creation of the WIPO web site for the submissions of accredited NGOs on the issues before the Committee. The Delegation endorsed the pragmatic framework approach to realizing further improvements as suggested in the document and supported the creation of an informal consultative forum for indigenous and local representatives in advance of sessions of the Committee based on the elements in paragraph 11 of document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/10. With regard to the issue on financial support, the Delegation recalled the view put by the European Community and its Member States at the Committee’s fifth session that participation of indigenous and local communities should be assured through the establishment of a voluntary fund modeled to the extent appropriate on the United Nations Voluntary Fund for Indigenous Populations. The Delegation welcomed the continued work on the possible establishment of formal structures for a voluntary fund. In particular, it was important that the voluntary fund be based on objective, transparent and low cost selection mechanisms. The Delegation concluded that the selection criteria mentioned in paragraph 15 of the document should be developed further.
The Delegation of the United States of America welcomed the proposals contained in document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/10 as a practical way forward to promote the immediate enhanced participation of accredited NGO representatives within WIPO’s existing budgetary resources. The Delegation noted that the proposal in the document would allow for enhanced participation with little administrative cost by drawing on existing funding mechanisms, facilities, contacts and expertise of the International Bureau and the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous issues. This proposal would avoid unnecessary delays in enhancing NGO participation that might otherwise result from protracted discussions on, and the administrative machinery involved in, the establishment of a separate WIPO voluntary fund for NGO representative participation. The Delegation welcomed the participation of the United Nations Permanent Forum on Indigenous issues and donor organizations in enhancing the participation of indigenous and local communities in the work of the Committee as proposed in the document. While it remained open to examine future proposals on the establishment of more formal structures in the future, the Delegation believed that experience with interim steps proposed would facilitate and inform these future discussions. The Delegation hoped that a positive experience gained through the interim steps proposed would obviate the need to establish a more formal structure within WIPO itself.
The Delegation of Japan supported the creation of an informal consultative forum for indigenous and local representatives based on the factors in paragraph 11 of document WIPO/GRTKF/IC/6/10. It added that such a forum could also facilitate and contribute to the further understanding on GR, TK and folklore, through the exchange of views by the representatives of indigenous and local communities. Additionally, the Delegation thought it appropriate that WIPO provide informative and technical briefings prior to the Committee sessions, from the view of Secretariat, on the activities of the Committee as mentioned in paragraph 13 (iii) of the document. The Delegation welcomed the encouragement of voluntary donors to support the participation of representatives of accredited observers in the Committee. With regard to the consideration and elaboration of the possible establishment of formal structure for a voluntary fund, the Delegation supported continued discussion on this issue as this structure might facilitate and promote the participation of indigenous and local communities. The Delegation thought it was important and appropriate to consider this issue cautiously, taking into account the budgetary implications and the relationship with other WIPO activities.
The Delegation of the Islamic Republic of Iran supported the participation of indigenous and local communities. The Delegation thought that the system of a voluntary fund would work in allowing participation. The Delegation added that, taking into account budget restrictions, the budget of WIPO should also be open, taking into consideration the transparency and simplicity of the administrative system of allocating the budget.
The Delegation of New Zealand considered participation of indigenous and local communities as an issue of fundamental importance, noting that the Committee should keep in mind whose knowledge was being discussed. The solutions or mechanisms which may be developed in the Committee are in fact a response to concerns raised by indigenous and local communities about intellectual property (IP) and TK. For these mechanisms to be effective they had to be appropriate to the needs of these groups and to ensure that their active participation was essential. The Delegation supported the creation of informal consultative forum if welcomed by those participants. The mechanism should not put more additional resource pressures on these participants and also should not be a primary means of indigenous and local community involvement. If a consultative forum was established, formal report back from forum should be provided to the Committee as part of the agenda. The Committee should set aside more time and opportunities for indigenous and local community NGOs to make interventions during the Committee. The procedures of the Working Group on Article8(j) of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) were a useful model. The Delegation supported the interim steps on funding as suggested in the document. It would be useful for the Secretariat to play an informal facilitative role in assisting voluntary funding agencies to contact accredited NGOs who may be interested in obtaining funding for attendance. The Delegation recommended that should a consultative forum be established and the convenors of such a forum were interested in undertaking a similar role, WIPO should resource them to do this. The Delegation expressed its concern at the slow progress made on the funding issue and called for a more formal or distinct fund to be created as soon as possible, in addition to coordinated voluntary funding. While interim measures suggested might have the advantage of providing better understanding of needs and possibilities, opportunities for indigenous participation would be lost as time went by. Overheads and administrative delays be minimized in the creation of such a fund. The Secretariat should explore the possibility of cooperation with existing funders. Should a fund be established, selected participants should reflect a broad geographical distribution and reflection of cultures. The Delegation expressed its support for the other selection criteria listed in the document.