3rd World Alliance Protests WTO/TRIPS

From: rcaplan@igc.org [mailto:rcaplan@igc.org] 
Sent: Thursday, November 30, 2000 3:31 PM
To: allianceannounce
Subject: ANN: Alliance Protests WTO/TRIPS


Dear Alliance Activists and Council members,  In response to a
request from Martin Khor and Cecilia Oh from the Third World Network
in Malaysia, we have signed on to the following statement protesting
the WTO's refusal to conduct a substantive review on the patenting of
life forms which is part of the TRIPS (Trade Related Intellectual
Property Rights).  The statement itself provides background on the
issue.  Further background from Martin and Cecilia follows that
statement for those who would like more details.  We urge you to
share this with other organizations in your networks.

In Alliance,
Ruth Caplan & Dave Lewit
Co-chairs, Corporate Globalization/Positive Alternatives Campaign


JOINT NGO STATEMENT ON THE REVIEW OF ARTICLE 27.3(b)
OF THE TRIPS AGREEMENT

We, the undersigned social movements, citizen groups and
non-governmental organisations, express our concern over the attempts
to prevent a substantive review of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS
Agreement.

Article 27.3(b) lies at the core of the debates surrounding patenting
of life forms, the effects of IPRs on farmers' livelihoods and food
security, local communities rights and access to resources, and the
environmental effects of IPRs. Article 27.3(b) facilitates the
mis-appropriation, by Northern corporations, of the traditional
knowledge and biological resources originating from the South. This
biopiracy of the South's resources is an ironic twist of the TRIPS
Agreement, which promised to facilitate transfer of technology from
the North to the South but instead is now being used by corporations
in the North to obtain private ownership rights over the South's
resources and knowledge.

Review stalemate

Its controversial nature necessitated a compromise text of Article
27.3(b), into which a review process had been mandated four years
after the TRIPS Agreement came into force. However, this review
process has been deadlocked, without any agreement having been
reached on the scope or timetable of the review. Many developing
countries view the review as an important opportunity to open up
Article 27.3(b) so as to revise it, in order to prevent and limit its
negative effects. The US, EU and most other developed countries have
consistently opposed proposals to amend the provisions, arguing that
the review is only about the extent to which the provisions have been
implemented.

TRIPS: Negative development and human rights impacts

In the meantime, there is increasing evidence to suggest that Article
27.3(b) is being employed as a protectionist instrument to promote
corporate monopolies over technologies, seeds and genes. The 1999
UNDP Human Development Report warns of negative impacts of high
standards of intellectual property rights on economic and social
development in developing countries. The United Nations
Sub-Commission for the Protection and Promotion of Human Rights
(Resolution E/CB.4/Sub.2/2000/7 dated 17 August, 2000) has also taken
note that "actual or potential conflicts exist between the
implementation of the TRIPS Agreement and the realisation of
economic, social and cultural rights in relation to, inter alia,
impediments to the transfer of technology to developing countries,
the consequences for the enjoyment of the right to food of plant
variety rights and the patenting of genetically modified organisms,
'bio-piracy' and the reduction of communities' (especially indigenous
communities') control over their own genetic and natural resources
and cultural values, and restrictions on access to patented
pharmaceuticals and the implications for the enjoyment of the right
to health ..."

In this connection, developing countries in the WTO have raised
important questions as to whether the TRIPS Agreement promotes or
hinders economic development of developing countries and enables
countries to strike an appropriate balance between public interests
and private rights. These fundamental issues are at the heart of the
review of Article 27.3(b) and must be addressed. During the Seattle
Ministerial Conference, developing countries had submitted numerous
proposals in an effort to address and resolve the implementation
problems they faced, including that of Article 27.3(b). The failure
of the WTO to address the implementation problems has resulted in a
loss of credibility of the multilateral trading system. If the WTO is
to rebuild confidence of the developing countries, a meaningful
review of Article 27.3(b) should be the first of many steps towards
this objective.

There is a growing public objection to Article 27.3(b), which not
only facilitates but makes it mandatory for all WTO member countries
to patent certain life forms and living processes. This is
unacceptable from the ethical, environmental, social and
developmental perspectives. We note with encouragement that many
developing countries have also come to the same conclusion and that
some of them have strongly voiced their demands that Article 27.3(b)
should be revised.

African Group proposal

In particular, we note that the African Group of countries in the WTO
has proposed that Article 27.3(b) should be amended to clarify that
life forms and living processes cannot be patented. A number of other
developing countries in the WTO have supported this position.
Unfortunately, there has been strong resistance from the US, which
would like to maintain the position that life forms can be patented,
and indeed, some must be patentable. This position, if maintained,
will lead to serious consequences.

Even now, patents on life are being granted almost indiscriminately
by patent offices, mostly in the North. These patents distort a
patent law system that was originally intended for mechanical
inventions, in order to grant corporations and individuals private
rights and ownership over biological and genetic resources,
traditional knowledge and genetically modified organisms, in order to
obtain monopoly profits. The patent system is being used to
facilitate the theft of biological resources and traditional
knowledge from the South. The monopoly control over such essential
resources will also have tremendous impact on food security and the
livelihoods of farmers and communities in the developing countries.

Our demands

The situation is very serious and requires urgent action. We therefore:

(1)    Strongly support the position taken by the African Group on
the review of Article 27.3(b), as contained in the paper submitted by
Kenya on its behalf (WT/GC/W/302, dated 6 August 1999). The African
Group has clearly laid down the approach and content of the review,
and should therefore, be followed. This is summarised below:

* The review of Article 27.3(b) must be one of a substantive nature,
not merely of implementation. In  such a substantive review, the
following issues should be clarified:

* Relating to the patenting of life, there should be a clarification
that plants, animals, microorganisms and all other living organisms
and their parts cannot be patented, and that natural processes that
produce plants, animals and other living organisms should also not be
patentable.

  * Relating to the option of establishing a sui generis system for
protection of plant varieties, Article 27.3(b) should be clarified
with a footnote which states that sui generis laws for plant variety
protection can provide for protection of innovations of indigenous
and farming communities in developing countries, consistent with the
CBD and the FAO's International Undertaking, preserve traditional
farming practices (including the right to save, exchange and save
seeds), and to prevent anti-competitive rights or practices which may
threaten food sovereignty of developing countries.

  * On the relationship between the TRIPS Agreement and the CBD, the
review process should seek to harmonize Article 27.3(b) with the
provisions of the CBD and the International Undertaking, in which the
conservation and sustainable use of biological diversity, the
protection of the rights and knowledge of indigenous and local
communities, and the promotion of farmers' rights, are fully taken
into account.

  * The implementation of Article 27.3(b) should be extended until
after the completion of the substantive review of Article 27.3(b).
The period given for implementation of the provisions should be the
same as that allowed in Article 65(1) and (2) of TRIPS; namely, five
years from the date the review is completed. This period is provided
to allow developing countries to set up the necessary infrastructure
entailed by the implementation.

(2)    Strongly urge other WTO Members to support the position taken
by the African Group in their proposals on the review of Article
27.3(b).

(3)    Call on the WTO Members to amend Article 27.3(b) as soon as
possible, in line with the proposals of the African Group, as stated
above.

(4)    Urge WTO members to agree on a moratorium on the
implementation of Article 27.3(b), whilst the review and revision of
Article 27.3(b) is on-going. The transition period expired on 1
January 2000; which means that the majority of the developing
countries are now legally obliged to implement Article 27.3(b).
Governments, which have yet to implement the TRIPS Agreement should
not be forced into enacting laws that will allow for patents on life.
Therefore, member countries should refrain from invoking a dispute
settlement procedure with regard to the implementation of Article
27.3(b), during the period of review of the provisions of this
Article and also, the review of Agreement itself under Article 71.1.

(5)    Call on WTO Members to agree to extend the deadline for
implementing Article 27.3(b) of TRIPS from the present date of
January 2000 to five years after the completion of the review of this
Article (as has been proposed by the African Group).

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

From: "Third World Network" <twnet@po.jaring.my>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2000 11:23:09 +0800
Reply-To: "Third World Network" <twnet@po.jaring.my>
Subject: [StopWTORound] Sign on to TRIPS Statement

APOLOGIES FOR ANY CROSS-POSTINGS

Dear friends and colleagues,

As you know, the WTO Council for TRIPS (Trade-Related Intellectual
Property Rights) has convened again from November 27-December 1,
2000. And, as with the previous meetings of the TRIPS Council, the
mandated review of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement will be on
the agenda.

However, the negotiations on the review have been at a stalemate;
with little progress being made since the review process started in
December 1998. The US, EU and some other developed countries are
still resisting a substantive review of Article 27.3(b), which the
majority of developing countries in the WTO have called for. The most
comprehensive proposal from the developing countries is articulated
in the paper by the African Group, submitted by Kenya on its behalf,
dated 6 August 1999 (WT/GC/W/302). The African Group's comprehensive
proposals have received much support from other developing countries
in the WTO, as well as, civil society groups, farmers' movements and
NGOs.

In August 1999, the "Joint NGO Statement of Support for the Africa
Group Proposals on reviewing the WTO TRIPS Agreement (Article
27.3(b))" was issued. This Statement now has over 600 signatories
from around the world. Further, in September 2000 in a letter to
Pascal Lamy, the EU Commissioner for Trade, NGOs demanded (among
other things) that the EU change its negotiating position on the
TRIPS review, to support the African Group proposal. At the recent
TRIPS Council meeting, the African Group had again, in a paper
submitted by Mauritius, dated 20 September 2000 (IP/C/W/206)
reiterated their proposals.

However, within the WTO itself and in the TRIPS Council, no real
discussion has taken place on the proposals outlined by the African
Group. The concern is that with each TRIPS Council meeting, the
attempt has been sideline the African Group proposal, and to detract
from a meaningful discussion on the merits of the proposal, and to
avoid a revision of Article 27.3(b).

It is therefore crucial that civil society groups around the world
mobilise to pressure WTO member countries to break the stalemate in
the TRIPS Council, and to press for a revision of Article 27.3(b), as
soon as possible. This pressure is needed now, because:

(1)    The mandated review of Article 27.3(b) represents perhaps the
only real opportunity to change this provision that allows for
patents to be granted on life forms. Such a review, if it is properly
done, has the advantage of being more focused, thus encouraging a
better analysis of the issues. A mandated review means that proposed
changes can be negotiated without the risk of being traded-off
against other proposals on other agreements, as has happened in the
Uruguay Round negotiations.

(2)    The transition period for the implementation of Article
27.3(b) expired on January 1, 2000. This means that the majority of
the developing countries are now legally obliged to implement Article
27.3(b) within their national laws. Otherwise, they face the imminent
threat of being taken to the dispute settlement body of the WTO.
Therefore, it is very important that a substantive review of Article
27.3(b) gets under way, during which time countries must be exempt
from implementing the provision.

(3)    Even now, patents on life are being granted almost
indiscriminately by patent offices, mostly in the North. These
patents distort a patent law system that was originally intended for
mechanical inventions, in order to grant corporations and individuals
private rights and ownership over biological and genetic resources,
traditional knowledge and genetically modified organisms, in order to
obtain monopoly profits. The patent system is being used to
facilitate the theft of biological resources and traditional
knowledge from the South. The monopoly control over such essential
resources will also have tremendous impact on food security and the
livelihoods of farmers and communities in the developing countries.

We believe that it is crucial for civil society groups to jointly
make a clear demand for the revision of Article 27.3(b) and to
campaign actively for this demand to be met. Hence, we suggest the
following actions for your consideration:

1. Sign on to the Joint NGO Statement on the review of Article
27.3(b) of the TRIPS Agreement (attached below) by sending your name,
organisation and address to the Third World Network
(twnet@po.jaring.my).

2. Help disseminate this Statement, and ask others to sign on to it.

3. Join in the global campaign against No Patents on Life. Use the
demands as stated in this Statement to lobby your government, to take
note of, and to support the African Group position. In addition,
start a campaign to build and spread awareness among other NGOs and
the public on the No Patents on Life campaign.

4. Tell us about your campaigns and actions. Civil society groups
around the world are campaigning against the adverse effects of the
WTO Agreements and are joining the international WTO: Shrink or Sink
campaign. They are also organising various campaigns against specific
WTO Agreements, including the TRIPS Agreement, the Agreement on
Agriculture, the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS), and
so on. These campaigns are organised in conjunction with the first
anniversary of the Seattle Ministerial Conference, which will be on 3
December, 2001. Civil society groups around the world will
demonstrate their solidarity in their campaign against the WTO
Agreements. We hope that you will be able to play your role.

We attach the Joint NGO statement on the review of Article 27.3(b) of
the TRIPS Agreement for your information and hopefully, your action.

With our best wishes,

Martin Khor and Cecilia Oh
Third World Network
Penang, Malaysia
(twnet@po.jaring.my)




Replies to this message will sent to the author only, and not to the list.
If you are eligible to post to the list (a member of the national council,
chair or co-chair of an Action Development Group, or the chair or designated
e-mail contact of a local chapter) and wish to reply, please do so by a new
posting.

___________________________________________________________
T O P I C A  http://www.topica.com/t/17
Newsletters, Tips and Discussions on Your Favorite Topics