On 15-19 March, the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO)'s
Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic
Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC) convened for its
first meeting since its mandate was extended for another two years at
the WIPO Assemblies in October last year (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 3
October 2003, http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-10-03/story1.htm ). The
Committee initiated work on establishing core principles and policy
options to prevent the misappropriation of traditional knowledge (TK)
and folklore. Differences, however, arose regarding the appropriate body
to deal with questions related to disclosure requirements for genetic
resources, TK and folklore.


Identifying key principles for protecting TK and folklore

In what was described as one of the most concrete outcomes of the IGC
meeting, delegates agreed to accelerate the substantive work on
protecting TK and folklore, to be carried out along two tracks. In the
short term, the Committee will identify policy objectives and core
principles for the protection of TK and folklore, which will provide the
conceptual framework for future discussions. In the medium term, the
Committee will compile specific policy options and legal elements as
well as a brief analysis of their practical implications. This work is
expected to provide the foundations for policy-making at both the
domestic and international levels, including a possible international
instrument for the protection of TK and folklore. While no timeline has
been set, concrete outcomes are expected within the current IGC mandate,
which runs until the end of 2005. The first draft will be prepared for
the next IGC meeting in November.

The initiative will draw, inter alia, on a 15 March submission by Egypt
on behalf of the African Group, which was widely welcomed at the IGC
meeting as a suitable framework for the Committee's work. The submission
outlines objectives, principles and elements of an international
instrument (or instruments) on intellectual property in relation to
genetic resources and the protection of TK and folklore. One observer
noted that while the African (and to a lesser extent the Asian)
countries were still pushing for a legally-binding international
instrument, some countries in the Latin American and the Caribbean Group
(GRULAC), in particular the signatories of the US-Central American Free
Trade Agreement (CAFTA), appeared to be reluctant to move towards such
an instrument. However, another source pointed out that while countries
might differ on the means for providing positive protection at the
international level, there appears to be growing acceptance of the
usefulness of such protection, marking a shift from the more cautious
positions in the early days of the IGC's work.


Differing views on assessing disclosure requirements

Many developing countries, including Brazil and the African Group,
questioned whether the IGC was the appropriate body within WIPO to
respond to the invitation by the Convention on Biological Diversity
(CBD) to assess the interrelation of access to genetic resources and
disclosure requirements in intellectual property applications. The
countries expressed concerns that hosting the discussions in the IGC
would not necessarily ensure that the Committee's work flowed into other
discussions at WIPO. Other relevant bodies include the Patent
Cooperation Treaty, where Switzerland has submitted a related proposal
(BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 28 November 2003,
http://www.ictsd.org/biores/03-11-28/story2.htm ) or the Substantive
Patent Law Treaty, where several developing countries have raised
biodiversity-related issues (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 11 December 2002,
http://www.ictsd.org/biores/02-12-11/story2.htm ). The discussions at the
IGC mirrored similar debates at the CBD's Conference of the Parties
(COP) in February, where several developing countries had opposed
specific references to the IGC in the COP Decisions (see BRIDGES Trade
BioRes, 20 February 2004,
http://www.ictsd.org/biores/04-02-20/story1.htm ).

Several delegations also felt that the WTO Council for Trade-related
Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) would serve as a more
appropriate forum for the discussions. They expressed concern that a
debate in the IGC would distract from or pre-empt a decision by the
TRIPs Council on a proposal by a group of developing countries, calling
for disclosure requirements and evidence of prior informed consent and
benefit sharing related to genetic resources and TK in patent
applications (see BRIDGES Trade BioRes, 19 March 2004,
http://www.ictsd.org/biores/04-03-19/story2.htm ). One observer, however,
noted that rather than providing an alternative forum, the IGC's work
could be used to provide the substantive basis for further discussions
in the TRIPs Council.

Given the lack of consensus on how to proceed with the CBD's request,
the Committee decided to forward the issue to the General Assembly for
consideration.


Enhancing civil society participation

Several observers noted an increased participation of non-governmental
organisations in the IGC. In particular with regard to indigenous and
local communities, discussions broadened from focusing primarily on
funding concerns to more substantive debates on how to ensure their
effective participation. The Committee agreed on several practical steps
in this regard, including the establishment of an informal consultative
forum for indigenous and local representatives in advance of IGC
sessions. They also welcomed the establishment of a website for
submissions by accredited observers, as mandated by the last IGC
meeting.


Additional Resources

IGC meeting documents:
http://www.wipo.int/documents/en/meetings/2004/igc/index_6.html .

Accredited observers' page: http://www.wipo.int/tk/en/igc/ngo/index.html