'TRIPS framework against interests of indegenous farmers'

Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs) under the Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) framework may have several implications on agriculture.

They may sensitise agricultural scientists, enhance research and strengthen domestic agri industries. Some, however, believe, that the framework can benefit only the developed countries at the expense of the developing countries.

"The TRIPS framework is against the interests of indigenous farmers. Women in rural areas use bio resources for food, medicine and for earning income. But the TRIPS agreement does not recognise that local communities have any rights over bio-resources and associated knowledge," said Suman Sahai, director, Gene Campaign at the two-day workshop on IPRs in Agriculture.

"It does not make any provision to ensure benefit-sharing from technology and innovation or consent of the rural women, whose knowledge is tapped for technological innovation," she added.

"Developed countries are trying to strengthen the TRIPS agreement through bilateral treaties. Developing countries must try to ensure that this does not happen, by establishing primacy of Convention of Biological Diversity (CBD) over TRIPS," Sahai said.

The CBD is involved with conservation and sustainable use of biological resources and it came into force on December 29, 1993. India is a signatory to it.

India also passed a Biological Diversity Act (BDA) in 2002. One of the objectives of the Act is to equitably share benefits arising out of the use of biological resources. Biological material includes plants, animals, microorganisms and their genetic material but not human genetic material.

S Chakravarthy, former special chief secretary, government of Andhra Pradesh and member of MRTP commission, said, "India is rich in traditional knowledge that is associated with biological resources. However, biopiracy of traditional knowledge has been a major concern in India. For instance, the patent on wound healing properties of turmeric has been an issue because of foreigners obtaining patents based on Indian biological materials." India also submitted a draft to the Committee on Trade and Environment of the World Trade Organisation in 2002 which said that the TRIPS agreement aids exploitation of biodiversity by privatising it," Chakravarthy added.

Article 27.3(b) of TRIPS Agreement states that all member states should allow the patenting of microbiological inventions and the protecting of plant varieties by patents or by some other effective legal means.

This invention may not necessarily be a product of modern biotechnology. So while neem, that has traditionally been used as a pesticide in India, has been patented in the US, Germany and Japan, Basmati rice also has been patented in the US.

Now, therefore, the US patent holders can stop the export of any Basmati rice from India or Pakistan to other countries.

Therefore, while the TRIPS agreement believes IP is a private right, the CBD does not. Harmonisation of these two agreements is essential to protect the interests of the developing countries and encourage agricultural research at the same time.