Box 1 What is a Patent

Box 2 Article 27.3(b) of TRIPs

Box 3 UPOV

Box 4 Farmers’ Rights

This paper summarises VOICE’s position on bio-patenting and in particular on the review during 1999 of Article 27.3(b) of the TRIPs agreement. Article 27.3(b) requires all WTO countries to provide some kind of intellectual property protection on plant varieties. It therefore requires WTO member states to grant legal monopolies on crop species, the basis of food security. Article 27.3(b) was thus one of the most contentious during the last round of GATT negotiations. Due to its controversial nature, a provision was made for a review of the Article in 1999. The WTO Council for TRIPs is currently carrying out the review. So far the review has consisted of an information gathering exercise on the implementation of this Article by member countries. Negotiations should focus on the provisions of the Article itself, as the outcome of the review will decide the extent to which developing countries will or will not be allowed to retain, in their own patent laws, exclusions for plant varieties and other life forms. The current review is thus of profound importance. Part 1 of this paper states VOICE’s position. Part 2 outlines the main issues that the review raises, and the background and regulatory framework in which the review is taking place.

"The objective of human development and environmental protection is being sacrificed on the altar of intellectual property protection" (Christian Aid, 1999)

Bio-patenting has serious implications for farmers, the environment, and consumers, both in Europe and the developing world. In 1998 VOICE launched a public awareness campaign to highlight the implications of the EU Directive on Patenting of Biotechnological Inventions, which was then under consideration in the EU. VOICE highlighted ethical questions raised by bio-patenting and the commodification of life, and also concerns about the effect patents on plants could have on the livelihoods of small farmers, on sustainable agriculture in the Third World as more and more crops become subject to monopolistic ownership by corporations, on biological resources, and on biodiversity. Although the Directive was passed at that time, it is currently being challenged in the European Court of Justice by the Dutch, Italian and Norwegian Governments.

Following on from our campaign early last year, in opposition to the EU Directive on Patenting of Biotechnological Inventions, we are concerned about the current review of Article 27.3(b). The outcome of this review will have important implications for the livelihoods of some two billion vulnerable people in Africa, Asia, and Latin America. Patenting of bio-diversity will encourage the privatisation of agricultural genetic resources by a few powerful corporations, which are acquiring seed companies, and are genetically engineering vital food crops. Thus, by genetically engineering and patenting crops, these corporations will own and control the means of production of food, affecting access to seeds, preventing saving of seed by all farmers, affecting food prices, and threatening food security. It will encourage biopiracy, the pirating of community and indigenous knowledge in relation to biological resources. The review will also have profound implications for the future global perception of how we view the earth and its resources.

Non-Governmental Organisations (NGOs) in developing countries such as India believe that countries should be allowed to construct their own national patenting laws, so that plants and animals can be excluded from patenting. Southern and northern NGOs emphasise that States should be allowed to develop legislation that will recognise the collective rights of indigenous and farming communities to freely use, exchange, and develop bio-diversity.

Alarmed at the lack of transparency in EU discussions on the WTO, VOICE aims to bring its concerns, and those of Irish and Southern NGOs, to the attention of Irish representatives at the EU and WTO meetings. As a major trade power, the EU will greatly influence decision-making at the WTO. As a member of the EU, Ireland can play a part in the development of the EU position on the Review of Article 27.3(b), to ensure that such a position is coherent with stated aims in Irish and EU aid and development policies towards developing countries. Article 130 (V) of the Treaty of the European Union on policy coherence states that the Community shall take account of development objectives, in the policies that it implements which are likely to affect developing countries.

VOICE is opposed to the commodification of life. In terms of this review, given that: