An analysis of practices and policies involving intellectual property, technology transfer and development shows the difficulties of achieving a positive correlation between those areas, writes Cheikh Kane.Intellectual Property Watch
8 October 2007
Inside Views: Open Letter From Staff To The Director General Of WIPO
Disclaimer: the views expressed in this column are solely those of the authors and are not associated with Intellectual Property Watch. IP-Watch expressly disclaims and refuses any responsibility or liability for the content, style or form of any posts made to this forum, which remain solely the responsibility of their authors.
Pour la version française, cliquer ici
Where are you Director General?
For the first time in WIPO’s history, the Assemblies were unable to agree on the adoption of the budget of the Organization. For the first time, the member states had to have recourse to a fratricidal vote on these questions and thereby to abandon the consensus approach, which had been the rule until then. For the first time, speeches made before the assembled member states, with an unusual number of ambassadors in attendance, were extraordinarily hard hitting and humiliating for the management of this Organization. For the first time ever, in spite of repeated requests from several delegations and in contravention of Article 9 of the WIPO Convention, according to which you are obliged to do so, you did not attend the meetings of the Assemblies, the supreme body of your Organization. Without any justification.
Where were you, Director General, these last days, while the future, the image and the reputation of your Organization were being dragged through the mud a few floors from your office? Where were you when our future, our image and our reputation were at stake? And what is more, when the future of the wealthiest of the UN institutions, the future of intellectual property and the future of creativity and innovation of developing countries were being questioned? Where were you to defend the organisation and us, your staff?
It is not our purpose here to comment or take a position on the accusations, the allegations and the evidence that the international press and the delegations are spreading around. Even if, as insiders, we have observed these things first hand. We have witnessed biased recruitment and promotion procedures, fictitious jobs, political favoritism, pressure tactics and intimidation of the staff and the staff association, virtual reforms, the lack of due process or of the failure to respect democratic principles or internal regulations. We do not wish to speak about this all too heavy burden of the past nor of our shame at seeing our name in the headlines of the newspapers, like a scandal in the tabloids. Instead we would like to look towards the future of our Organization in order to recover the motivation, which made us join in the first place.
All we want is to work. Seriously. Professionally. Fair and square. To work in the spirit of the United Nations and according to the principles that you have so often appealed to in your speeches: transparency, accountability, responsibility, and professionalism. We want to work for the intellectual property rights holders who finance 95 percent of our Organization. We want to work for developing countries which, more than ever before, need a strong organisation on their side. Selflessly. And not hell bent on our career. Or on rescuing it.
The WIPO Assemblies have left us with a bad aftertaste. The recognition of an awful waste having occurred. A profound feeling of powerlessness after all too many years of turbulence and frustration. Did it have to come to this? A reputation destroyed, a credibility that has vanished, a professionalism called into question? Was it necessary to pit one group against the other, following an outdated strategy of another age and time? Confidants against ordinary staff? North against South. Was it a necessary to hold certain delegates hostage and to pervert certain political objectives? Was it really necessary to thereby gratuitously put an end to 40 years of progress based on consent and dialogue, which had characterised this Organization up to now?
Nobody can rejoice in victory today. If there is a victory, it is a Pyrrhic victory, which corroborates the existence an institutional crisis, a moral crisis, and a crisis of confidence. No speech or press release denying these facts can make this reality vanish before our eyes. And no one can take comfort in the outcome of these Assemblies. Not you. Certainly not us. It is in everyone’s interest, WIPO member states and staff alike, to restore the legitimacy, the credibility and the professionalism of our Organization. Without these three pillars, could one honestly hope to be heard/taken seriously in the face of the numerous challenges of globalisation?
We want to hereby call upon your sense of honor, your common sense and your magnanimity, that we know so well. Don’t listen to those who advise you stubbornly to stick to a go-for-broke approach like a kamikaze. They have their own agenda. It is not yours, not ours, not the one of the Organization. Not even that of the developing countries. Only one solution can bring this Organization out of this tragic crisis. Immediately. And you know what it is.
Cincinnatus
This name represents a group of WIPO staff, from all grades, nationalities, races and religions.
Lettre ouverte au directeur général de l’OMPI
Où êtes-vous Monsieur le Directeur général?
Pour la première fois de son histoire, les Assemblées de l’OMPI n’ont pu adopter le budget de l’Organisation. Pour la première fois, les Etats membres de l’OMPI ont dû avoir recours à un vote fratricide sur ces questions et abandonner la règle du consensus qui prévalait jusqu’alors. Pour la première fois, les propos tenus dans l’enceinte de l’assemblée générale par un nombre inhabituel d’Ambassadeurs présents ont été d’une dureté et d’une fermeté avilissante pour le management de l’Organisation. Pour la première fois dans son histoire, en dépit des requêtes répétées de plusieurs délégations et de l’article 9 de la Convention de l’OMPI qui vous en fait l’obligation, vous n’avez pas participé aux réunions de l’organe suprême de votre Organisation. Sans aucune justification.
Où étiez-vous Monsieur le directeur général ces derniers jours alors que se jouait, à quelques étages de votre bureau, l’avenir de votre organisation, son image, sa réputation? Mais aussi notre avenir, notre image, notre réputation! Et au-delà, l’avenir de la plus riche des institutions onusiennes, l’avenir de la propriété intellectuelle, l’avenir de la créativité et de l’innovation des pays en développement. Où étiez-vous Monsieur le directeur général pour la défendre et pour nous défendre?
Il ne nous appartient pas ici de commenter ou de prendre parti sur les accusations, les allégations et les preuves tangibles que la presse internationale et les délégations diffusent. Même si rien, de l’intérieur, ne nous a échappé. Ni les procédures de recrutement et de promotion galvaudées, ni les emplois fictifs, ni les favoritismes politiques, ni les pressions et les intimidations sur le staff ou son association, ni les réformes virtuelles, ni l’absence d’un état de droit ou le respect des règles démocratiques ou des règlements internes. Nous ne voulons pas aujourd’hui parler de ce passé trop lourd et de la honte à voir notre nom faire la une de tous les journaux comme un scandale de tabloïd, mais regarder vers l’avenir de notre Organisation afin de retrouver la motivation qui nous y avait fait entrer.
Ce que nous voulons, c’est travailler. Sérieusement. Professionnellement. Equitablement. Conformément à l’esprit des Nations Unies et aux principes qui ont si souvent émaillé vos discours: transparence, accountability, participation, professionalisme… Oeuvrer en faveur des titulaires de droits de propriété intellectuelle qui financent 95% de notre Organisation. Agir pour les pays en développement qui, plus que jamais, ont besoin d’une organisation forte à leurs cotés. Désintéressés que nous sommes. Et non arc-boutés sur nos plans de carrière. Ou leur sauvetage.
Les Assemblées de l’OMPI nous laissent un goût de cendres. Un constat d’effroyable gâchis. Un sentiment d’immense lassitude après trop d’années de turbulences et de frustrations. Fallait-il en arriver là? Une réputation anéantie, une crédibilité désormais inexistante, un professionnalisme questionné? Fallait-il dresser, dans une stratégie d’un autre âge, les uns contre les autres? Les affidés contre les travailleurs? Le Nord contre le Sud? Fallait-il prendre certains délégués en otage, travestir certains desseins politiques? Et remettre ainsi gratuitement en cause les 40 ans de consensualisme et de dialogues sereins qui avaient caractérisé cette organisation?
Nul ne peut aujourd’hui célébrer une victoire. Si victoire il y a, c’est une victoire à la Pyrrhus qui consacre durablement une crise institutionnelle, une crise morale et une crise de confiance. Aucun discours ou communiqué de presse niant ces évidences ne peuvent nous faire zapper cette réalité des faits. Et personne ne peut s’estimer sortir grandi de ces Assemblées. Pas vous! Certainement pas nous. Il est dans l’intérêt de tous, Etats membres et personnel de l’OMPI de restaurer la légitimité, la crédibilité et le professionnalisme de notre Organisation. Sans ces trois piliers, peut-elle honnêtement espérer faire entendre sa voix face aux challenges de la mondialisation?
Nous souhaitons faire ici appel à votre code de l’honneur, à votre bon sens, à la générosité que nous connaissons. N’écoutez pas ceux qui vous conseillent de vous entêter dans une politique jusqu’au-boutiste et kamikaze. Ils ont leur propre agenda. Qui n’est ni le vôtre, ni le nôtre, ni celui de notre Organisation. Ni même celui des pays en développement. Une seule solution s’impose pour sortir de cette crise tragique. Une solution immédiate. Vous la connaissez…
Cincinnatus
Nom regroupant un collectif de fonctionnaires de l’OMPI, hauts fonctionnaires, cadres et services généraux, de toutes nationalités, races et religions.
Categories: English, Inside Views, WIPO
8 October 2007 at 8:17 pm
Perhaps Dr. Idris is Innocent of what this article charges him for. Perhaps when a man is innocent, he has to stand still. It is perhaps not the staff’s role to communicate in anything of this nature, as he was elected by member states. Perhaps professionalizm does not include advertizing on IP Watch to galvanize public support.
8 October 2007 at 10:07 pm
If this letter were open for signature, many staff of WIPO would be happy to add their names to it openly
9 October 2007 at 2:10 pm
Cet article me fait beaucoup de bien, en ce sens qu’il résume parfaitement la situation que traverse l’ OMPI depuis quelques années. La nouvelle direction a mené l’ organisation au cahos. C’est impensable d’en arriver là. Ouf ! espérons qu’il lui reste un minimum de bons sens pour s’éloigner le plus lploin possible de la propriété intellectuelle, tellement il en est indigne.
9 October 2007 at 4:23 pm
Peut-être, cher Ramcharan, que le DG est innocent. Peut-être alors que votre naïveté dépasse toute l’énormité des preuves qui l’accablent. Peut-être aussi que le personnel de l’OMPI a encore plus de preuves que toutes celles déjà étalées. Peut-être aussi qu’il n’ose pas les divulguer, encore engourdi par les pressions qu’il subit et qui l’étouffe depuis tant d’années. Peut-être alors qu’il se rends ainsi coupable lui aussi, d’avoir “laissé faire”. Peut-être alors qu’une purge doit commencer. Conviendrez vous alors, cher Ramcharan, que c’est par en haut qu’il faut commencer.
9 October 2007 at 9:37 pm
As we all have an interest on IP Issues, the Issue of Mr. Idris has attracted many of us, however, I find that all these articles and commuication lack one thing…the truth?? what the fact finders find against Mr. Idris, thus if the staff of WIPO are indorsing professionalizim, so be it, they have to stick to what the fact finder would say……..we all need to see the truth in front of our eyes…I mean convictions not allegations otherwise I would find the above article as selfserving not more not less.. serving agenda of people who had been very supportive of Mr. Idris at his glory days and eating his meat at the time of shame………..shame on you all shame on whoever indose professionalizim and do not abide by the simple rule of it… shame of Mr. Idris who kept silent….., please take the shame out of you all and speak the truth for the sake of the IP
10 October 2007 at 1:16 am
“We want to work for the intellectual property rights holders who finance 95 percent of our Organization.”
At least WIPO employees don’t hide where their interests resides.
10 October 2007 at 11:32 am
I would have to agree with Ramcharan’s comments. Regardless of what the DG may or may not have done, it does smack of un-professionalism to have such a letter published openly.
10 October 2007 at 12:12 pm
There is, in my view, an indication of the way the Organization is run: the Press release on the conclusion of the GA took 5 days to be published. And the way the fact are described concerning the budget is, to say the least, biased. There are 7 lines all together concerning the Budget for 2008/9, by far the most important issue of the GA and 8, for example, for the desk to desk assesment. No description of the impact of the non approval of the budget apart from a generic statement to the fact that it will be the same as for the current biennium. No mention at all of the issues related to the DG. And this is what the current management calls “transparency”.
The letter above is interesting but lacks one major component: transparency. The letter should be open for signatures and the staff should have the courage of their views.
On the other hand the letter falls short of mentioning the rude and arrogant way of some member states in dealing with the issue of the DG. There are facts that need to be verified. There are too many rumours, also circulated by the UNJIU used as an armed arm by some delegations, which need to be discarded.
Neither the DG, nor the Developing countries nor the Rich countries come out well from this confrontation. Member States have been successfully manipulated by the current top management but this is not a long term success. The management has to step down, all the management. But member states have to take the appointment of the new management more seriosuly than in the past. The current mess is also their fault, it is in fact their fault. They took advantage of the mismanagement they created and now they do not know how to get out from the mess their own mess.
10 October 2007 at 12:36 pm
Alas, at this stage the question is no longer whether the DG is innocent or not, as Mr Ramcharan would have it. Now WIPO is facing a full blown crisis of confidence and credibility. Now the issue is whether the DG intends to manage the Organization without the support of an important part of its member states, without the support of the host country (of which his wife and kids are naturalized citizens), without the support of the IP users, of eminent spokesmen for the developing countries such as Sisule Musungu from the South Center or Martin Khor from Third World Network and without the support of more and more of the staff of the Organization. And this in the face of serious criticism of his stewardship of the Organization by JIU, PwC and others. The question is not any more about Kamil Idris’ future but about the future of the Organization.
Obviously, those who have been recruited at WIPO as an accommodation to an ambassador, head of agency or similarly placed individual have a different appreciation of democracy and due process…
10 October 2007 at 11:59 pm
every time I read a development ir A comment on Mr. Idris Issue, one thing would come to mind, if that man is what the article is saying, if that man that bad to the exten of having been denounced by his own staff, then who is behid the mega success of WIPO in his past 2 consecutive terms when he was assuming the rule of DG of a well reputed organizatoin like WIPO, and at the end how serious or perhaps how serious his wrong doing would measure to that success??? is a wrong entry of the actual birth date would outweight the many good and accurate perhaps genuine entires he made on the IP records, policies, developments???perhaps that man would have something more or at least would deserve more, but at the end I quess the concern is not the IP rights holders who finance the organization but its the d’ POLITICS….that kept and still playing us all…
12 October 2007 at 1:57 pm
Fictitious jobs? Thats the biggest racket in the UN! Too bad a lot of people are duped into applying when most job openings are actually already reserved for someone with the right connections. WIPO is no exception!
13 October 2007 at 6:18 pm
The recent spotlight on WIPO which has put her on the lower rung of the scale is very unfortunate and sad too. An organisation that has been in the forefront of everything Intellectual and even much more recogning with accountability,integrity,transparency and legitimacy and demanding the same from nations and peoples in their dealings is now tasked to exhibit same.
It is therefore my opinion that the Director General of WIPO should leave self and be more sensetive to what the organisation has been known for all these years and also for the future of the same organisation. It is not about self preservation and or continental pride but the larger world and the organisation’s relevancy in the scheme of things. Therefore the DG sould trade the only part of honour and be noted as a man who rose to the challenge of preserving the integrity,honour of WIPO at a crucial time like this ,rather than self and or continent and or parochial small interest group.
The whole world is watching, listening and reading about WIPO,let all of us who are stakeholders,interest group,staff and sympathisers now think twice and be responsible in our utterances,actions and inactions so that at the end of this whole matter,WIPO will be better for it.
Edwin Nnametu (Mr)
Intellectual Property Agent-Nigeria
13 October 2007 at 10:10 pm
Pourquoi n avez vous pas vous même présenté les conclusions des Assemblées ? Comment comptez vous gérer les mois à venir et comment comptez vous redonner confiance à une grande majorité d’employés de l’organisation ? Pourquoi ne nous laissez vous pas une chance de redonner à l’OMPI, la réputation, la crédibilité dont elle jouissait quelques années auparavant. Vous avez perdu la confiance d’une partie des Etats-Membres, du pays qui accueille cette organisation..et d’un grand nombre de vous employés..si votre souhait le plus profond est de redonner toute sa crédibilité à notre organisation, à un endroit où nous travaillons et nous consacrons beaucoup de notre énergie, parce que nous croyons à ce que nous faisons….et que le succès de toute entreprise passe par la confiance et la motivation …laissez nous une réelle chance de redonner à l’OMPI tout le respect qu’elle mérite..
16 October 2007 at 10:43 am
Une grande majorité des collaborateurs de l’OMPI souhaitent maintenant que leur Organisation redevienne ce qu’elle était jadis :
Un havre de créativité, de motivation au travail, de respect et d’honnêteté. Un nouveau chapitre doit maintenant commencer, pour le bénéfice de nos partenaires professionnels, la satisfaction de nos Etats Membres, la sérénité de notre pays-hôte, et surtout, pour le bien-être et la sécurité de chaque collaborateur.
Une décision ferme est maintenant nécessaire.
Il ne s’agit pas de stigmatiser toutes les erreurs faites durant le passé, sur une seule personne. Il y a aussi eu beaucoup de positif. Notre Organisation a grandi, et non pas seulement en nombre.
Le personnel de l’Organisation demande que lui soit fait confiance à nouveau, de la bouche-même de son Directeur général.
>>
A great number of WIPO colleagues express today the wish that their Organization would become again as it was before:
A place of creativity, enthusiasm for the work, respect and honnesty. A new chapter has now to begin, for the benefeit of our professional partners, the satisfaction of our Member States, the serenity of our host-Country, and above all, for the wellbeing and the security of each and every co-worker.
A strong decision is requested now.
It is not necessary to make a single person endorse all the mistakes made during the past ten years. There has also been a great deal of positive action. Our Organization has grown, and not only in numbers.
The staff of this Organization asks that it may be fully entrusted again, expressed by the Director general himself.
24 October 2007 at 3:45 pm
In reply to 14 (Enki), in fact WIPO has never been ‘un havre de créativité, de motivation au travail, de respect et d’honnêteté’. And why is that? It’s staff frankly. And I have been witness to this for many, many years now. Instead of being grateful for the many privileges we have (which are far more numerous now, thanks to Mr. Idris), WIPO staff clamour for promotions, complain about this and that, criticise their colleagues, spend too much time gossiping and spreading rumours over coffee instead of actually working. And those disgruntled employees who did not get what they want (yes, putting their own interests first and not those of the organization) seem to be the most ready to add fuel to the fire now. As in many of the UN Organizations, there are some dedicated workers and unfortunately rather more who take it too easy. It is time to let Mr. Idris and the member states worry about his age or whatever else and get back to work. Can’t believe how many of you are so happy to throw stones – look at yourselves in the mirror first. And let’s not play into the hands of a few member states who surely don’t have our best interests at heart.
25 October 2007 at 2:43 pm
In reply to 15 (Dear Another Wipo Colleague), I strongly believe that Wipo will certainly be a place where motivation for the work prevails again, as it was before, and many will then readily focus on their work, as you express it so well. What we all want is a more straightforward, clean and honest environment, don’t you agree? Humble staff is just tired of unfair treatment, and longs to be proud again.
Let the happy few, of which you seem to be an anonymous part, encourage more justice and change, instead of protecting indefensible dishonest behavior.