NGOS PROTEST WIPO-WTO MOVES ON UPOV AT BANGKOK
Bangkok, March 18 (TWN) -- A two-day World Trade Organization-sponsored
meeting that opened Thursday in Bangkok to discuss the implementation of the
TRIPS agreement, and sui generis systems for plant varieties protection has
allowed participation of industry leaders from Europe and North America but
denied participation to the groups most affected - farmers and rural
communities, says a communique from a coalition of NGOs.
The Bangkok meeting is to discuss how Asian countries plan to implement the
biodiversity provisions of the WTO Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS), which requires developing countries to
grant monopoly rights over new varieties of plants before 1 January 2000,
either through patenting or sui generis system.
The biodiversity clause of TRIPS, Article 27.3 (b), is so controversial that
when governments signed it at the closing of the GATT Uruguay Round in 1994,
they did so under the proviso that they would review it in 1999 -- one year
before developing countries actually have to implement it.
Organized by the Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV),
an intergovernmental organization based in Geneva, the Bangkok meeting has
received active support from WTO and the World Intellectual Property
Organization (WIPO), the NGOs note.
The UPOV Convention, as amended by its 1991 protocol, gives exclusive
patent-like protection to corporate plant breeders. This means that
companies like Monsanto or Novartis are allowed to exact fees from farmers
and other breeders who want to use new seeds.
The system was created by industrialized countries back in 1961 as an
"alternative" to patenting. However, each revision of the Convention blurs
UPOV has tried to get Asian governments to adopt its Convention for many
years, but national scientists have resisted it. They fear that TNCs will be
the one to benefit.
In their joint statement, the NGOs accused the WTO of "lending support to
the concerted campaign of UPOV, the US government and the $30 billion
commercial seed industry to force plant breeder's rights legislation as the
only option for developing countries."
"The pressure bearing down on developing countries to join UPOV as a means
of fulfilling TRIPS Article 27.3 (b) is an attempt to sidestep and weaken
the review process at WTO," says Cecilia Oh of the Third World Network.
"The ASEAN group in the TRIPS Council has requested that WTO conduct a
serious and substantive review of the provision of Article 27.3 (b) itself.
However, countries like the US want to reduce the review to a meaningless
exchange of information about implementation," she added.
Witoon Lianchamroon of BIOTHAI, a multisectoral group working closely with
Thailand's Forum of the Poor and Alternative Agriculture Network, says,
"UPOV is here in Bangkok trying to sell itself as the best solution for
governments to fulfil their TRIPS obligation in Asia. However, the UPOV
system completely overrides farmers' rights and Thai communities cannot
BIOTHAI sought permission for farmers' groups to participate in the
discussion, but this was flatly rejected.
"The UPOV option is not suitable for India," says Ashish Kothari of
Kalpavriksh, a Puna-based NGO, which helped draft India's Biodiversity Act.
"It only protects the interests of the formal seed sector, ignoring the
interests and rights of millions of farmers who have been breeding and
developing seeds for thousands of years."
UPOV would sharply accelerate genetic erosion in India, Kothari underlines.
Binu Thomas of Action Aid India's National Food Rights Campaign, operating
from Bangalore, agrees. "Transnational corporations (TNCs) spend millions of
dollars developing a few new plant varieties which they then have to get
planted in millions of hectares to recoup their investment costs."
"Monopoly rights, like UPOV, fast-track this profit seeking exercise for big
TNCs but at the expense of the farmer's capacity to feed his or her own
family," he added. "Because the farmers legally lose control over the seed
in this system, they are forced to pay for inappropriate research like
That's very threatening to a country like India, he believes.
The spectre of monopolies on biodiversity worry many sectors in Indonesia as
well. Since the late 1980s, rice production has been dominated there by one
single variety (IR64), which has Indonesia in state of severe vulnerability.
Local NGOs have been trying to help farmers broaden their options, while the
government imports five million tonnes of rice a year. The introduction of
private monopoly rights for breeders could destabilise the situation even
"The Indonesian government has been doing little to face up to the real
meaning of WTO-TRIPS," explains Riza Tjahjadi of PAN Indonesia. "It revised
the patent law in 1997 to make plant varieties patentable, but it has not
enacted it yet."
In the meantime, the sui generis option is being ignored, Tjahjadi added.
"Any sui generis system for Indonesia would have to be based on farmers'
rights. UPOV only protects industry's rights."
Renee Vellve from GRAIN's office in the Philippines adds, "In Africa, both
the Organization for African Unity and a grouping of Southern and Eastern
African trade negotiators are also pushing for a complete review of TRIPS
Article 27.3 (b)."
"Their main concern is that systems such as patenting or UPOV fail to
recognise the collective rights of local communities to genetic resources
and traditional knowledge, and therefore foster biopiracy. African
governments want the sovereign rights of nations to exclude biodiversity
from TRIPS," Vellve said.
The joint NGO position urges developing countries to call for a moratorium
on the implementation of Article 27.3 (b) before 1999 runs out.
"Not until a substantial review -- the terms of which must be openly and
transparently determined, and agreed upon by the South -- is conducted,
should developing countries implement Article 27.3 (b) much less consider
joining UPOV," the statement said.
Tension is growing over the issue, the statement notes. Recently, 7,000
Philippine farmers publicly demonstrated their opposition to TRIPS in Negros
in central Philippines. With support from groups like MASIPAG -- a national
farmer-scientist partnership helping farmers in their own breeding work --
and the Philippines Greens, debates and mobilisations have been organized
throughout the country to examine the options for small scale food producers.
"Biodiversity should be taken out of TRIPS," say MASIPAG farmers. "Farmers
manage the country's genetic resources as the peoples' resource. We are
innovators too. Intellectual property rights are anti-farmer,
SUNS #4398 - Third World Network
Geneva, Friday 19 March 1999
© 1997 SUNS
ABOUT THIS LISTSERVER -- BIO-IPR is an irregular listserver put out by
Genetic Resources Action International (GRAIN). Its purpose is to circulate
information about recent developments in the field of intellectual property
rights related to biodiversity & associated knowledge. BIO-IPR is a strictly
non-commercial and educational service for nonprofit organisations and
individuals active in the struggle against IPRs on life. The views expressed
in each post are those of the indicated author(s).
HOW TO PARTICIPATE -- To get on the mailing list, send the word "subscribe"
(no quotes) as the subject of an email message to
<email@example.com>. To get off the list, send the word
"unsubscribe" instead. To submit material to the list, address your message
to <firstname.lastname@example.org>. A note with further details about BIO-IPR is sent
to all subscribers.
ABOUT GRAIN -- For general information about GRAIN, you may visit our
website http://www.grain.org or send an email to <email@example.com>.
To Unsubscribe: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command
To Subscribe to Digest: Email email@example.com with the command
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: