Sisule F. Musungu - The 2009 WIPO General Assemblies opens today with, for the first time, a highly anticipated high level ministerial segment. According to a press statement released by WIPO, this segment of the Assemblies will bring together over forty ministers to discuss “national IP priorities”. WIPO argues that this high level segment reflects the importance of intellectual property (IP) in senior-policy making levels. It is worthwhile to look abit deeper and think about the implications of this new development at WIPO.
Where is all this headed?
It is a first, and naturally, there are questions as to where WIPO is going with this high level segment. Is it going to be an annual event? Will it remain a discussion forum or will ministers eventually move into decision-making at the General Asemblies in the future? Does it really reflect a high level engagement on IP policy? Why the focus on national IP priorities as opposed to areas of priority for international cooperation?
As we ponder these questions and review what the ministers will have to say, a few things come up with the high level segment.
Where is OECD, G7?
Forty seven ministers are listed as attending the Assemblies. Except for a number of ministers from some of the new European Union (EU) countries, such as Croatia and Malta, the ministers essentially come from developing countries and least-developing countries (LDCs). We do not see OECD or G7 ministers. It is not clear whether ministers from developed countries were invited and snubbed the meeting or whether they were not invited at all. Whether they were invited or not there is an important question as to why developed country ministers are missing from this gathering. Does it reflect the low priority they give to IP? Does it reflect the level of priority they give to WIPO?
Without suggesting disrespect to the gathered ministers, there is no doubt that some observers will see the skewed attendance as an attempt by WIPO to indoctrinate developing country ministers as a precursor to push for certain treaties or new directions in the organisation. I have so far seen no evidence of this, but the quality of the ministers’ statements and discussion will tell us whether they really attach importance to IP. For example, the play that the WIPO Development Agenda gets in speeches will tell us quite abit. The understanding of issues in the patent and copyright committees as well as issues around genetic resources and traditional knowledge and folklore will also be another pointer.
A cocktail of ministers
It will be interesting to watch if the gathering is talking towards a common purpose or at cross-purposes. The meeting brings together ministers from a range of portfolios. The majority are ministers in charge of the trade and/or industry portfolios in their countries. Other ministers are in charge of science and technology, economic development, investment, culture, justice, constitutional affairs etc. Naturally, except for cases where there in-country policy coordination, the portfolio of the minister will determine their approach to IP. This is not necessarily a bad thing.
A better understanding of these different approaches and the nature of concerns represented from different portfolios is important for WIPO to produce better balanced standards and norms going forward. This mix may also help ministers who have not realised yet that IP is a cross-sectoral matter to do so by meeting ministers from different portfolios in other countries who also address IP. This is a particularly important point for developing countries where trade ministers have dominated IP policy-making to the exclusion of others. It may also serve as a starting point to democratise IP policy-making both nationally and internationally. At WIPO, and in many countries, especially developing countries, law and policy has essentially been run by IP offices with little or no democratic scrutiny.
