Intellectual Property Watch

Original news and analysis on international IP policy

US Renews Effort To Topple WIPO Director General

by , Intellectual Property Watch 18 Comments

By William New
United States Ambassador to the United Nations Warren Tichenor on Thursday reiterated a call for answers to allegations surrounding the head of the World Intellectual Property Organization, who the US and others are pushing to resign out of concern for his leadership ability.

WIPO Director General Kamil Idris has come under fire after a confidential internal auditor’s report surfaced late last year showing Idris may have over two decades systematically misreported his age to his advantage. Idris formally corrected his age in WIPO records in 2006 citing a technical error, effectively making himself 9 years younger than recorded.

The US, Switzerland and others pushed for a discussion of the issue at the late September-early October WIPO General Assemblies but were partly blocked on procedural grounds. The assemblies ended without adoption of a budget for the next two years. Idris’ office has held fast to the position that he is innocent and the target of a smear campaign. African countries have backed Idris, who originally came from Sudan.

The renewed US call comes after circulation earlier this week of an appeal to the director general to put organisational interests ahead of his own signed by more than 230 WIPO employees. The appeal and an African Group defence of Idris are available on www.ip-watch.org. The issue continues to generate a running discussion on the Intellectual Property Watch front page between WIPO staff and other stakeholders.

“The WIPO internal audit report raises serious questions about the judgment, character, and integrity of the director general and his ability to effectively lead the organization, charges which have been echoed by a growing number of member states in recent weeks,” Tichenor said in a statement. “The United States notes with great interest the appeal issued by WIPO staff members regarding the current impasse at WIPO. The United States is also concerned about the crisis in leadership at WIPO.”

Tichenor directly linked resolution of leadership issue with progress on a newly agreed WIPO Development Agenda, though Development Agenda proponents have downplayed the link. The United States was a reluctant participant in the Development Agenda negotiations which were aimed at ensuring the work of WIPO and the benefits of the intellectual property system are spread equally among all member states.

“The current crisis of leadership at WIPO must be expeditiously resolved so that the vital work of the organisation, including the Development Agenda, can move forward in a positive fashion,” Tichenor said.

Tichenor made clear that the United States is seeking a replacement for Idris. “WIPO deserves a director general who is above reproach and who can effectively lead the organisation into the future,” he said. “The US will continue to play a constructive role to put WIPO on a solid footing so that the organisation can resume its critical role of promoting innovation, economic prosperity and development through a strong global IPR protection system.”

It is unclear what procedure will be followed should Idris not elect to step down, but several scenarios are being discussed among member states, sources said.

William New may be reached at wnew@ip-watch.ch.

Creative Commons License"US Renews Effort To Topple WIPO Director General" by Intellectual Property Watch is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Comments

  1. EDWIN NNAMETU says

    The integrity,honour and transparency of the prime leadership of a body such as WIPO need not to have a question mark. Those who push for a change of leadership must be honour,it cannot be seen that they have a hidden agenda,racism must not be the denominator.In the recent past we saw a change at the world bank, Dr Idris may look at that,then U S A and other member states at the fore front of Idris fall must not forget to come to equity with clean hand when the dial changes.

    Edwin Nnametu-Intellectual Property Agent-Nigeria

    Reply

  2. Tao says

    Le debat semble depasser maintenant la seule taille de l’echiquier constitue par les enjeux et motivations des uns et des autres et devrait donc se placer à un autre niveau faisant appel à un certain degré d humanisme et de respect que l on peut encore attendre de chaque individu.

    Il ne s’agit plus d un debat concernant la seule personne de Monsieur Kamil Idris. Au dela des allegations, critiques, commentaires, questionnements qui resteront probablement à jamais sans response, et au dela des doutes, des incertitudes et de la perte de confiance exprimés par une grande partie des Etats Membres, d un grand nombre d employes de l’organisation et du pays d’accueil de cette dernière, chacun d’entre nous doit oeuvrer pour la reconstruction de cette organisation dont nous pouvions etre fiers par le passe.

    Si vous avez un tant soit peu de consideration pour cette institution Monsieur Idris et finalement pour vous meme, nombreux sont ceux parmi nous qui vous seraient reconnaissants de quitter l’OMPI la tete haute.

    Je m adresse egalement au secteur prive et au secrétaire général des Nations Unies dont on attend qu ils jouent le role qui leur est imparti.

    Reply

  3. Rodin says

    The movie ‘Wag the Dog’ comes to mind. US, at its best creating ripples and diversions to claim the success of WIPO and that of Dr. Idris as its own. For the just and professional minds, integrity, both by member states and the few WIPO staff who seem to want to discuss it, should start by looking at ‘ who leaked the ‘confidential’ UN document. The Integrity of the JIU has been lost, and also that of Member States and WIPO for not demanding an investigation of this crime against the UN, WIPO Staff and International Civil Servant’s Code. All International Staff should be worried about the Rule of Law which in this case is not above the US. It is worrying that the US seems to be everywhere in this game. Let us hope for the best and that Euroeans will wake up soon instead of being wagged by the Media Dog.

    Reply

  4. Petros says

    This Article is written at the right time for the US Immigration Services. How dare the US wishes to raise the question of integrity when their administration can not read any foreign document correctly to begin with. Having immigrated to the US some 20 years ago, my wife and I, after filing several papers that they have mistakenly translated our birth certificates and given us passports with different birth dates. My wife is from an Arab speaking country. Not only did they invert her year of birth but also instead of 11/2 (November 2) they had her for 2/11 (February 11). Because of this when we presented our birth certificates in the US (which contain our correct date of birth) to get married, they said that they will only take the US passport as proof of date. So, we both have been giving birth dates that we never lied about, for the past 18 years. I knew at least a dozen colleages with this problem from former communist countries. In those days, it was difficult to go back to the country of origen so we just kept the only paper that proved, that at least we were born. Two years ago we got an appology letter from the US, after 18 years of filling wrong and false (by US standards) date of birth, because no agency would look further than the passport, through no fault of our own. Please train your US administration bodies, look at the countless plea letters filed for making administrative mistakes on translating documents, before you point at someone and dare question their integrity. You will find that your INS will take the trophy for inverting Arabic numbers that are written left to right. This is not a test of Dr. Idris’ ability to lead, but rather on the need for administrative bodies in the West to train their civil servants. In fact, coming from a developing country with clear vision and managment the has been exemplary, Dr. Idris brought WIPO and Intellectual Property to levels where all citizens of the world could benefit. Give credit where credit is due. From what is seen, bullying other countries and encouragable WIPO staff to agree with you in this crusade will anagonize the good citezens of your country. It is better to uphold the rule of law, and lead Member States on the right path of why a UN document has been leaked. This would be the most integrity that any member state with rich intellectual property culture and productve citizenary show.

    Reply

  5. Brian Thompson says

    The Comment by Petros is off point. It was not a mistake by WIPO administration. It is a deliberate act by Idris to falsify his birth date and to try to correct after 20 years!

    Reply

  6. Rodin says

    You are right Brian, it is a little bit off, but he is right about administrative mistakes when translating Arabic documents by the US itself. It is a common problem that those born in Arabic speaking countries face when going to countries with Latin based languages. What it is interesting is though the US seems to ignor the leaking of this UN doc. (when the integrity of the US member of the JIU is on the balance) first and foremost. The US, having prejudged then acts as the jury in this article (by the republican businessman turned ambassador), and then the US wants member states to judge (the only conclusion that they want you to make). Hey, I do not think this is Iraq. If we are not with them, it does not mean we are against them. Member States simply question and see ‘who is to benefit from this’. Is it Dr. Idris who did it to his own detriment of loss of money and media attention or is it other business interests by a republican. At this time, Dr. Idris should be supported, instead of being attacked racially and using his staff to create a problem within the organization. They are just being used.

    Reply

  7. Brian Thompson says

    I am soory Rodin you are falling into the trap of the famous logical fallacyArgumentum ad hominem (argument directed at the person). This is the error of attacking the character or motives of a person who has stated an idea, rather than the idea itself. The most obvious example of this fallacy is when one debater maligns the character of another debater (e.g, “The members of the opposition are a couple of fascists!”). The question is not the Character or the political inclination of the American Ambassador. It is not also a question of translating Arabic Documents. It is one of multiple birth dates used by the DG 1945,1954 and 1953 in Ohio State University.

    Reply

  8. Brian Thompson says

    Robin

    One more point. Has WIPO administration acknowledeged that they have made a mistake in translating an Arabic Document? mIt will be interesting to get an official answer to tjhis question.

    Reply

  9. Vox Populis says

    It took the circulation of an appeal by WIPO staff to finally make Mr. Idris go public again. He has scheduled a series of meetings with the staff this week with the purpose of explaining the achievements during his two mandates at the helm of the organization. Last Friday it became clear that the WIPO Staff Association was going to host an appeal started by some 230 employees a couple of weeks ago. The Staff Association received a petition signed by more than 70 of its members asking for assistance in circulating the appeal, in which Mr. Idris is being asked not to place his personal interests above those of the organization and the staff.

    Mr. Idris is countering the petition and the appeal it refers to with a campaign of his own: whoever supports the appeal would be seen as supporting racism! Another way to ward off internal critics is to try to silence them. The head of human resources circulated a general message to all staff today telling them that “the subject of the petition falls within the mandate of the Member States and the Director General himself.” The message ended by stating: “As a consequence, staff members are invited to continue to focus on their work, bearing in mind the general rules of conduct expected of international civil servants.” It so happens that WIPO rules clearly state that the staff should “pledge themselves to discharge their functions and regulate their conduct with the interests of the International Bureau only in view.” So, much to the regret of Mr. Idris and the head of HRMD, a large group of WIPO employees are standing up for what they believe is their duty: defending the organization.

    But allow me to comment briefly on the alleged racism in WIPO. An isolated poster seen by practically nobody in the organization seems to have come at a good time for Mr. Idris. Now that he has come under serious criticism for breaking staff rules by misrepresenting his age for over two decades, racism conveniently surfaces. By banking on the racism ploy Mr. Idris could be playing a dangerous and irresponsible game. He is pitting staff and member states against one another. It is not the color of the skin that is being questioned but the honesty of a man who breaks the very same rules he is called upon to apply and uphold. And I think that is called accountability and not racism in any continent, race or religion.

    Vox Populis

    Reply

  10. Rodin says

    Aha… thanks for your illumination on fallacy. The view under Brian seems to orignate from reading the confidential document which was left for him to consume the way he did (start here with the fallacy of character of those who allowed this). It sounds tempting does it not?. Wagging of the dog started here. A gag order would have taken effect by any law abiding jury if the attempt was that the man lacks integrity. One can not have it both ways, chose one and prove it without the doc. The public and media opinion is requested here for there was no strong argument, but just an expectation for us to jump and feel anger (this is the fallacy par excellence) If it is about managment, all proof shows that the man has lead WIPO successfully, whether he is black or not is not an issue as some Staff of WIPO added to the mix.

    To catch the fallacy, follow the money!!!. We do not live in a vacum with black and white sides, there are shades of interests here. Leaking the doc. and then acting as judge and jury is rather a senseless crusade for a just mind. It is this character of the proponents that need to be questioned indeed. Petros has shown that such problems existed and will for a very long time, in good or bad faith, as long as diversity of language exists. Many non-latin based language countries understand this therefore not allowing the fallacy to take hold.

    Reply

  11. Brian Thompson says

    Rodin

    Still you or WIPO administration have not come up with a satisfactory answer to my question: Was it WIPO mistake in translating a document or the DG deliberately falsifying his birth date? The fact that a confidential document was leaked does not in any way negate the wrong doing by the DG . Those are two seperate issues. The most honourable and transparent way was fir the DG to go to the Assembly and refute the allegations. It does not serve any purpose for him to lobby staff as no one is challenging his achievements. He is still blind to the real issue at stake and its grave consequences.

    Reply

  12. Brian Thompson says

    Dear Fox
    I am surprised he has the guts to schedule a series of meetings and face staff. I would love to look at his face.

    Reply

  13. staff member says

    Brian. “He had the guts to show his face” as you clearly state. Unlike you….. This world is full of cowards and hypocrates. When he doesn’t address the staff——-oooooooohhh it is a problem and when he does address the staff………..ooooooooooooohhh it is another problem. WIPO staff have gained a lot during Dr. Idris’ tenure(especially short termers who have a lot benefits unlike other organizations) plus he has also done a lot for IP. Painting the past era as a bed of roses is a total lie—there were advantages and disadvantages as in any other organization. Throwing stones and racism will not get us anywhere. Let’s strive to work in love and leave the Member States and Dr. Idris to sort out his date of birth.

    Reply

  14. Juana says

    To begin the date was apparently entered by the DG himself. Not an administrative error in translating document. Whether it was done intentionally or not is up to speculation. The issue for me is not or should not be the initial mistake, as it could have been, but the continued use of the false date. Then again, I think the bigger issue is why the US waited until this GA to ask for the DG’s outster citing this issue. Nothing was mentioned during the last GA, despite the Swiss Government having been made aware of the “error” since April 2006. There were newspaper articles about the matter in the summer of 2006. I have to wonder what the motive behind the move at this juncture could be.

    (I find it telling that a good portion of the negative publicity against the organization and the DG coincided with one of the more “controversial” meetings, either on patents or the development agenda. There has to be something there.)

    If the issue as presented today is so serious, why the wait. There was sufficient time to allow the WIPO Convention and Staff Rules to play out and there would not have been a need to leak the document, which of course was a fetal error from a legal standpoint. I am sure that the US and Group B could have mustered sufficient numbers to call for a special sitting of the Coordination Committee prior to the 2007 GA and a recommendation made to the GA. They did not take that route. Why?

    I think there is something to the reference to wagging the dog. We, as the public, are conveniently provided with only sufficient information to hang the man. What is the truth on the other side? I am not suggesting to support the DG’s action, but knowing how the system works and how these governments operate that there is more than just a his birth date. Last year the DG was seen as being a very effective leader even by some Group B members and even in light of the information on his alleged “lie.”

    Reply

  15. jerry says

    an interesting post on WIPO practices:

    1. 10/23/2007 – 10:0:0AM
    BY: Richard Brown
    IDRIS’ questionable gifts. I note the growing controversy surrounding Dr. Idris’ changes of his date of birth.

    I attach a copy of the “Letter of Appointment” dated October 2, 2001 signed by Kamil Idris Director General of WIPO. Attached to this letter were the General Conditions of Employment of WIPO. Dr. Idris letter reads: “I am pleased to offer you an appointment as a WIPO Expert to undertake a mission to Belmopan Belize, under the terms and conditions indicated in the attached General Conditions of Employment (Emphasis Added) and hereafter”. The business class trip to Belize in October 2001 cost $ 4,881.10.

    The letter was directed to the Deputy Commissioner for the Trademark Examination Policy of the USPTO, an employee of the US Government.

    1. I always believed that you cannot serve two masters at the same time.
    2. I sent Francis Gurry – Assistant Director General and Legal Counsel of WIPO an e-mail of July 17 2002. The e-mail said: “I am preparing an article on the Madrid Protocol. Please let me know where I can obtain a copy of WIPO’s regulations regarding its ethical conduct in regard to payments or gifts to officials of national patent and trademark offices”.
    3. Mr. Gurry answered me on July 21, 2002 (Sunday) “WIPO does not make gifts or payments to officials of national patent and trademark offices”.
    4. Dr. Idris’ Letter contradicts Francis Gurry’s statement that WIPO does not give gifts to officials of national PTO’s as the trip was a gift of $ 4, 881, 10. Clearly under the guidelines of WIPO’s Legal Counsel, Dr. Idris’ letter was grossly improper.
    5. The gift also seems inappropriate as the 2001 USPTO Budget was over One Billion Dollars. The PTO could afford to pay for necessary travel by its PTO official.
    6. The gift was effective in that the official was a vocal proponent of US adherence to the Madrid Protocol. INTA’s April 3, 2003 statement to the US Congress thanked her and others for their support of the Madrid Protocol. Despite receiving multiple favors from WIPO the official did not recuse herself from supporting WIPO’s projects.
    7. It is worth pointing out that WIPO’s gifts to the official began in July of 1991 with the gift of a trip to Switzerland worth $1,028.25 and that, WIPO’s gifts to her ceased after the US joined the Protocol.
    8. Dr. Idris’ gift of $ 4,881.10 to the official in 2001 was a follow up to her “election” on November 5, 1998 to WIPO’s Standing Committee on the Law of Trademarks International Designs and Geographical Indications. My FOI request for information on her compensation was denied. Perhaps Mr. Di Palma or members of Cincinnatus can comment on the amount of compensation for this position.
    9. The fact that the Madrid Protocol will help WIPO’s finances and the national purposes of some countries does not justify these actions of Dr. Idris, especially where the adherence to the Protocol would harm the country in question, as may be the case with Brazil.
    11. Clearly there is the need for WIPO to enact a code of Conduct and for Dr. Idris to be replaced as Dr. Idris cannot say his signature on the October 2, 2001 was a typographical error.

    Reply

  16. YASINN says

    Brian Thompsom must be very naive or mis-informed: All UN organizations require that certificates be presented in the language of the application (as a certified translation); in Geneva it should be French or English. Thus WIPO Administration has aligned itself to the certified documentation presented by the staff member and has not mis-translated any document.

    As far as “Juana” states, the Swiss authorities accepted the correction last year and a qustion could be raised if the Swiss Mission at all opposed the documentation !

    Reply

  17. Brian Thompsom says

    Yasinn
    You responded to the questions I put to Rodin and the WIPO administration. You put the blame squarely on the DG

    Reply

  18. Rodin says

    To the comment made under 16,

    It does not look like Yasinn’s comment (under 15) was blaming anyone. On the contrary, it was questioning as did the comments under 13 and 14. At the very least, it did not deal ‘squarely’ with anything as you put it under 16. The thing that is clear is that the situation begs for questions because of the rush to topple Dr. Idris (specially by the US Ambassador) when the DG was being supported and admired by him up until 6 months ago. The US member fo the JIU being the one who, alledgedly, leaked the doc., the few staff that are are being influenced by the member states that are in group B and attempting to create division among staff and problems within WIPO, the orchestrated media right before the GA launching the attack on not only the DG but a few others who seem to be around him while at the same time grooming a few others for the position of the DG… comon!!!. It all looks too orchestrated and too obvious for an information that has been around for over a year with a GA meeting in between. The ambassdor of the same country that has allegedly leaked the document which was supposed to have broken Dr. Idris, seeking public denounciation of Dr. Idris. Comon!!! This kind of wagging the dog has been seen and done. I think the US should try other methods whatever it is its reasons for not wanting Dr. Idris. It can definetly not be his ‘integrity’ for US or the Swiss are showing no better ‘integrity’, it can not be his lack of managment for his achievments are in stark contrast with the past of the orgnaization- too large to ignore and too significant for the public to denounce. The need for questioning and inquiring on why now? why by US and Swiss on something that was already out there for so long, why circumvent the UN procedures when the UN system could very well handle this, why was it necessary to leak a document by (the US?! alegedly) so that the US Ambassador can use it in a seemingly defamatory way as if to show integrity? why call on mismanagment when in fact the Organization (by most definations) is much more useful to the world (not just to rich countries) and better known worldwide since Dr. Idris came to power? why was he openly appreciated by group B until 6 months ago even after the leaked document, and now we are bombarded on his lack of integrity?. Sorry Brian, we need to ask because it does not add up at all. However, when looking at what the US wants from WIPO, the near future building contracts of WIPO (possibly lucrative), the US Republicans leaving shortly (possibly losing power in inernational organizations), one must wonder and look at the big picture. No one knows of course, but I think the public and specially WIPO employees should not be used and should not be taken for granted. From what it seems, on this discussion, not many people, including staff buy the US argument of integrity (integrity was lost when leaking a document, by whoever it was. If they were interested in integrity they should have investigated it). The media and few staff revolutionaries seem too orchestrated for a serious and meaningful improvment of WIPO or UN organizations. Wagging the dog might not work here. I am sure Dr. Idris would not want to live through this for too long because it is not worth it even if he is strong and well apprecaited by majority of member states. What ever he does seem to be wrong, as comment on 13 shows. Member States will do what they wish, and US will influence others of course, but public opinion and majority of staff seem to be unwilling to line up with the US on Dr. Idris ‘integrity’ no matter how much craft is being applied to wag the dog, raise mismanagment questions, attempt to influence WIPO staff from within and other racism (horrible) attempts are being thrown at him personally. Regarding your question, the rule of the UN are so clear on its internal justice system (read Hinds on IP Watch), and the papers that have to be filed as in comment 15. To the by-stander, the thing that seems out of place is, the leaking of the document which in my view is the very reason why you will never have an answer to your question. Dr. Idris may not be tried once in public and once again by the UN you see. It is an injustice to a UN procedure first of all, seconly to the employee and thirdly and most importantly becasue it circumvented the due process that should have taken place putting the question as you said squarely on Dr. Idris to explain. Since it stopped the due process and the US went on blindly assuming that it was a question of ‘integrity’, we will never know or rather, Dr. Idris will never be asked in good faith without assumption of his guilt. I do not know about you, but I think the US does everything for purpose and it might be that it wanted to take the attention away from the seriousness of what was done and the question of investigating the JIU itself for leaking the doc. It could be that toppling the DG was an easier loss for the US than being alleged for leaking a UN doc. I agree with most writers who question things when it comes to this case. To a large extent, Petro’s explanation of Arabic docs. making such historical blunders is not new, years later after their arrival in the countries they immigrated to. It sounds plausable explnation for now for there is not much to support that the DG of WIPO has lied, or mismanaged. Whereas our recent memory of collecting proof by the US who wishes others to follow, wagging the international agenda, is not all that great, in fact, could be considered, ‘unecessary’.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Sign up for free news alerts