WIPO Leadership Race - Part IV: The North-South Question

The North-South Question^**

Political processes, such as the election of DGs of specialised agencies in the United Nations (UN) and other international organisations, as well as substantive negotiations in these organisations, continue to be heavily coloured by the North-South divide. Indeed, the North-South phraseology continues to be a catchphrase not only in international organisations but also in work of development agencies and private foundations, non-governmental organisations (NGOs) and civil society, in academia as well as business. Of course, the dividing line is not always as straight as the hyphen between the two words and there is more to the world than these two groups of countries. On the latter point, account has to be taken of the emerging role of the Eastern European countries (EEC) and the Former Soviet Union (FSU) countries on the international scene.

In recent years, nowhere have the North-South undercurrents played such an important role as in field of IP. Whether we are talking about the TRIPS Agreement and public health in the WTO or the Development Agenda at WIPO or negotiations on IP in bilateral and regional free trade agreements (FTAs) and economic partnership agreements (EPAs) or of public health, innovation and IP in the World Health Organization (WHO), the North-South equation, for better or worse, has loomed large. The North-South language can be used, on the one hand, to express genuine differences in world views and needs and, on the other, as political rhetoric to disguise questionable ideas.

Consequently, when someone stands up in the name of the South and claims that “WTO should die” and it would not matter, it should be obvious that such person has simply run out useful ideas and needs to be consigned to the dustbin of history. However, when groups of countries, for example, argue that there are genuine differences between developed and developing countries which necessitate a differentiated approach to the applicable IP rules, such is an expression of a genuine idea that is relevant for today’s generation and for posterity.

The upshot of the above observations is that the North-South question is relevant in the leadership of WIPO, though its importance may vary from issue to issue and change overtime. In this context, the question we seek to address in this part of the series is the following: In which ways is the North-South question relevant in WIPO matters and hence for its leadership? The question can be relevant in at least three ways - should it matter where the next DG comes from? Is it important that the next DG has a good understanding of the North-South dynamic both in terms of political processes and in terms of substantive matters at WIPO? How should the North-South equation be addressed in future negotiations and other matters, such as staffing, at WIPO?

Does it matter where the next DG comes from?

Of the two DGs that WIPO has so far had, the first was from the North, and the second, from the South. Does this mean that the next DG should be from the North or, with a significant of candidates from EEC and FSU, from this region? The answer to this question should be obvious from the previous parts of this series. It is a blessing for WIPO that the 15 candidates come from all regions of the world. With such diversity, WIPO Member States should determine the next chief executive of the organisation based, not primarily on where they come from, but on the candidate’s integrity, intellectual capacity, managerial competence, tough-mindedness, vision and political astuteness. Experience at WIPO, and across the many international organisations in Geneva and elsewhere, tells us that attributes like integrity; competence and vision generally defy North-South classifications.

Among the Candidates, Who has the Better Grasp of the North-South Dynamics?

The North-South divide is not only a political reality but also reflects real differences in the worldview of WIPO Member States on substantive IP matters. The divide also reflects an acknowledged division in trade terms between technology exporters and importers, or put in the words of economist Ha-Joon Chang; between those who have reached the top and want to kick away the ladder and those who still need the ladder to get to the top. The political and substantive schisms that have opened up among the WIPO Member States as result of the handling of the allegations against the outgoing DG or the negotiations on a draft Substantive Patent Law Treaty (SPLT) as well as the schisms among WIPO staff require a DG who will neither dismiss nor overplay the North-South undercurrents. A DG who pretends that there are no North-South issues in WIPO or who overplays these issues, for example, with respect to staffing, is likely to push the organisation into further turmoil.

A review of the responses of the DG candidates to the policy questions by the news group Intellectual Property Watch, particularly the responses to the question on the future of the Development Agenda, provides interesting insights in to the thinking of the candidates regarding the North-South question. While most candidates appreciate the importance of North-South issues in the organisation, some have a better grasp than others. The candidates who have a good grasp of the undercurrents are those who realise that though there is broad agreement on the Development Agenda, controversy and divergent worldviews still persist among Members States with important North-South fault lines. These are the candidates who recognise that continual building of consensus will be required in the implementation phase. Candidates who profess the existence of unconditional support for the Development Agenda, from developed and developing countries alike either have something to learn or are pretending about the reality for political gain.

The North-South Equation and the Future of WIPO

The sharpness of the North-South divide in WIPO, as will be the case in the broader UN system and in other international organisations, will continue to evolve as the issues under negotiations change; as the structure of knowledge ownership shifts; as new business models come into play; as consumer interests in developed and developing countries coalesce; and as the demographics in different countries change. It is beyond the scope of this series to analyse how each of these changes will impact the North-South equation. However, suffice it to say that taking advantage of new knowledge and opportunities at WIPO could help reduce the negative consequences of the divide. This is particularly the case with respect to WIPO norm-setting activities and staffing matters.

In the case of norm-setting, a two pronged approach is suggested. To start with, an acknowledgment of the mistakes such as those made with respect to the handling of the negotiations on a draft SPLT would be an important step. Secondly, the creative utilisation of the norm-setting principles agreed in the context of Recommendations 15 and 21 of the WIPO Development Agenda, among others, holds alot of promise.

With respect to staffing, the proper implementation of the recommendations in the various reports on management including that of the UN Joint Inspection Unit (JIU) and on desk-to-desk review would be a good start. However, the issues that have arisen with respect to cronyism in appointments and promotions will also have to be addressed to provide an atmosphere that reduces the need for staff to take recourse in regional or racial affinities.

** North is used here to refer to developed countries which are grouped together in WIPO as Group B while the South refers to developing countries which group together in the UN under the umbrella of the Group of 77.