Sisule F. Musungu – There was anticipation, hope and a sense that multilateralism was experiencing one of those good moments. That was last week at the 20^th Session of the Standing Committee on Copyright and Related Rights (SCCR) at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The anticipation and hope, by many, was that the Committee meeting would end with a definite work programme towards a legal instrument to improve access to copyright material for those who are blind or with visual impairment or with print disability. Finally, the world of intellectual property (IP) was going to act decisively to end “the Book Famine”.

Ignominy

Alas, the meeting ended at midnight on 24^th June 2010 ignominiously. The Member States could not come to an agreement on the summary of what happened earlier in the week and in previous Committee session with respect to how to proceed. Simplistically, it could be said that it all fell apart when those who wanted the work on the treaty for visually impaired to proceed immediately based on the broad agreement to move forward and those who “strategically” wanted the so-called holistic approach. It is not entirely useful to go into the argumentation of each side but suffice it to say WIPO Member States let down the millions of blind and visually impaired people around the world who for decades have been asking for legal mechanisms to address their plight. There were some powerful statements at the meeting from speakers representing the blind and visually impaired from around the world. Of course, there were other issues which also fell by the way side. From issues on broadcasting to those related to protection of audio-visual performances.

But why is failure to agree last week an indictment on WIPO’s Committee procedures and working methods? One main reason. Essentially, nothing will be done until the next session of the Committee in November 2010 (See the Press Release on Session). In other words, though everyone agrees that there is an urgency and no time should be lost, the system is such that the Secretariat has no mandate to do much and the Member States generally will meet in formal sessions except where informal session are clearly agreed on. Further, the Chair of the Committee is elected for each session at the beginning of the session and the current Chair, in any case, is not based in Geneva. This is not the first time this happens and will not be the last time. Because of that the WIPO Member States and the Secretariat need to give some serious thought on how negotiations are conducted.

Rebranded and Refocused

In the last few years WIPO has undergone tremendous change. Significant improvements have been made within the Secretariat and the organisation’s general outlook has also changed. Recently, WIPO unveiled a new logo and branded itself as the organisation working to encourage creativity and innovation. If WIPO is to live up to this new image and brand, if it is to lead the world to address the myriad issues we need to address in order to encourage creativity and innovation, then there must be some creativity and innovation around how Member States interactions are managed. As to how this can be done, I have offered some ideas in “The WIPO Development Agenda and the Changing Face of WIPO” published in April 2010. The ideas in this study are not necessarily the best solution but the conversation on this issue needs to start yesterday….

The blame game will go on but one would have been consoled if, at least, the midnight debacle did not mean that there will be no real effort this week and next and next month to move things forward.

Time for Accountability – Programming and Budgeting at WIPO

Watching the SCCR debates and many other Committees in WIPO you would be forgiven if you thought that WIPO has no planning process or a programme of work. WIPO, in a Member State driven and controlled process, has an elaborate Programme and Budget which sets out the priorities for the organisation and allocates resources. This includes in the areas of copyright and related rights. The current Programme and Budget (for the 2010/2011 biennium) runs to over 200 pages. But what will happen if what is set out as priorities (for example work on issues for the blind and visually impaired) in the Programme and Budget is not achieved? Probably nothing and the Member States will go on to have a new programme and budget and burn a few more millions of dollars. It would help WIPO and world of creativity and innovation a great dealt if the Member States in Committees like SCCR remembered what they agreed to achieve in each biennium.