Tentative New Wording For Draft WIPO Instrument Protecting Genetic Resources

Delegates at the World Intellectual Property Organization this week started discussing core articles of what could potentially become a treaty preventing the misappropriation and the granting of intellectual property rights on genetic resources. Facilitators named by the chair of the WIPO committee addressing this issue produced a new tentative draft version of the objectives of such treaty. 

The 35th session of the Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC) is taking place from 19-23 March.

The tentative new text [pdf], which is not a formal document and simply “work in progress,” as noted by IGC Chair Ian Goss.

The committee whose mandate was renewed during the last WIPO General Assembly in October is looking at genetic resources (GR) this week, and working from a version of a consolidated document [pdf] from the 30st session of the IGC, in June 2016.

The facilitators produced a textual proposal for Article 1 (objective) of the consolidated document, reformatting the original text so as to combine alternatives and producing an article with three paragraphs, which seeks to aggregate all points of views.

They left in brackets the most contentious wording. One is about GR derivatives, which some delegations are opposing. Derivatives are defined in the Nagoya Protocol [pdf] on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization to the Convention on Biological Diversity. It states: “a naturally occurring biochemical compound resulting from the genetic expression or metabolism of biological or genetic resources, even if it does not contain functional units of heredity.”

The other words left in brackets signalling lack of agreement are “patent” and “IP”. Some member states, such as Egypt, Tunisia and Ecuador, would like that the instrument developed by the IGC refers to all kinds of intellectual property protection. Others would prefer that the instrument only concerns patents.

Gone from the original text is the word “misappropriation,” with which some delegations, such as the United States did not agree, preferring the term “unauthorised” use.

Some countries such as Indonesia for the “Like-Minded Countries,” Bolivia and Egypt indicated they would prefer the word misappropriation to be used.

Margo Bagley from Mozambique, one of the facilitators, said the objective of the instrument is not an operative provision of the agreement. Having the word misappropriation in the objective would not make it effective. Article 3 of the consolidated text including a disclosure requirement would make it operative.

After discussions and comments on core issues, including the subject matter of the potential instrument, the disclosure requirement, sanctions and remedies, a new draft text is expected to be released on 21 March for member state appreciation. The facilitators are tasked to try to encompass all comments and points of views expressed the first two days of the session.

 

Image Credits: WIPO