March 1, 2017
Draft Statement of the Permanent Mission of the Republic of Indonesia On Behalf of the Like-Minded Group of Countries (LMCs) The 33rd Session of IGC, Geneva, February 27 – March 3, 2017
Indonesia has the honour to deliver this statement on behalf of the Like Minded Group of Countries (LMCs), a coalition that represents more than 60 countries coming from three different groups within the IGC, namely the African Group, the Asia Pacific Group, and Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries.
We are delighted to see you again. We are also happy and delighted to have Ms. Margo Bagley as the facilitator. We are confident Mr. Chair, that with your leadership, and with yours as well as the facilitator’s expertise and hard work, this committee could narrow existing gaps and reach common understanding on the issues at hand. The LMCs would also like to thank the Secretariat for the preparation of this meeting.
Please be assured of LMCs’ full support and cooperation in rendering this session of IGC a success. The LMCs reaffirms its commitment to engage constructively in negotiating a mutually acceptable outcome.
The issue facing this committee is an important issue, not only for all member states, but more importantly for indigenous and local communities everywhere that have created and developed tradition-based knowledge and cultural expressions, as well as innovation, long before the modern IP system was first established. All communities have the right to maintain, control, protect and develop intellectual property over their cultural heritage. We need to push for a greater recognition of both economic and moral rights of traditional and cultural heritage, including genetic resources, traditional knowledge, and traditional cultural expressions.
Substantial progress has been made within the IGC, noting the progress regarding Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge related with Genetic Resources during IGC 29 and IGC 30, significant progress has also been made regarding Traditional Knowledge during IGC 31 and IGC 32. We are confident that this session and future sessions of the IGC will yield progress as well.
Regarding the draft articles on the protection of traditional cultural expression, we need to focus our discussion on the most important aspects in the text. We need to minimize distractions and use our valuable time efficiently by not prolonging discussions on issues where positions are already well laid out and understood by all members within the IGC.
On the issue of beneficiaries, there is no dispute that the main beneficiaries of this instrument are indigenous and local communities. However, there are certain circumstances in which TCE cannot be specifically attributable to a particular local community or indigenous community. This usually occurs when TCEs are not specifically attributable or confined to a local community or indigenous community or it is not possible to identify the community who generated them. Under these circumstances, the LMCs suggest that the provision on beneficiaries should address this concern and include other beneficiaries as defined by the national laws of member states. Furthermore, discussion on beneficiaries is closely related to the administration of rights, to reach a common understanding regarding beneficiaries, discussion on administration of rights is of paramount importance.
With regard to the scope of the protection, there seems to be converging views that emphasize the need to protect the economic and moral rights of the beneficiaries. For this purpose, determining a standard on certain levels of protection that accommodate the rights granted for each TCEs will ensure that such protection is achieved.
The LMCs invites the Committee to take into account the practical value of establishing the level of rights as determined by the character of the TCEs in question and the character of their use. Establishing the level of rights by the character of the TCE would provide an opportunity to find convergence on core elements, namely the subject matter of protection, beneficiaries, the scope of protection and the exceptions and limitations. In this regard, we recommend continuing further the discussion on this particular issue.
Other important issues are the exceptions and limitations. On this matter, it would be essential to ensure that the provisions are not too extensive in order to prevent compromising the scope of protection.
Noting the importance of effective protection for Genetic Resources, Traditional 28Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expression for all of us, we should move forward together taking the next step for the convening of a Diplomatic Conference with a view to adopting a legally binding instrument or instruments providing effective protection of Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Traditional Cultural Expression.
Before I conclude this remark, let me once again express our confidence to the Chair and the Vice Chairs in guiding our discussion to enable us to make progress on the draft Texts of TCE.
I thank you, Chair.