The Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP) working under the Ministry of Industry and Commerce has released a ‘Country Position Paper’ on ‘traditional knowledge’. The paper and the ‘national consultations’ that followed the publication of the position paper aimed at clarifying the official position of the Government of India taking place before the Inter-Governmental Committee on Traditional Knowledge at the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO). The result of the national consultations can be accessed over here and here.
While any such move to increase public consultation and academic input into policy making is a welcome step, I must point out that this particular effort with regards to traditional knowledge appears to be a duplication of the Government’s own efforts over the last few years especially the efforts of the National Biological Authority which released its own TK rules over 2 years ago. The NBA at that time had carried out extensive public consultations and discussions on these rules. We had blogged about this over here. Now out of the blue we have yet another Ministry stepping into the fray. Unlike the DIPP, the NBA functions under the Ministry of Environment & Forests.
One would hope that the Government of India is at the very least aware of which Ministry is supposed to handle which job.
Any idea if DIPP is going to recruit pat examiners this year or how? because its almost 8 months since the advertisement was out…
Dear Prashant,
Traditional Knowledge Management Bill was initially submitted in 2000 to the Core Group on Traditional Knowledge constituted by the Department of Higher Education, MHRD, Government of India. This was prepared by Mr.Prof.N.S. Gopalakrishnan.
Later the bill ‘Traditional Knowledge Management Bill, 2009’ was revised based on the feed back of members of Core Group. Mr.Prof.N.S. Gopalakrishnan was the key man behind the Drafting and revision of this bill when he was HRD Chair on IPR, Centre for IPR Studies, CUSAT. This draft bill was submitted to the DIPP, Government of India in April, 2009.
In the year 2009, the Government of India by exercising its powers conferred under sections 36(5) and 62 of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002 and on the recommendations of the National Biodiversity Authority, introduced a new draft bill called “THE PROTECTION, CONSERVATION AND EFFECTIVE MANAGEMENT OF TRADITIONAL KNOWLEDGE RELATING TO BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY RULES, 2009”
Later on there was a discussion and consultation meeting organized by NBA in Chennai in 2010. Mr.N.S. Gopalakrishnan was well aware of this new bill and its further developments.
If one goes through all the bills and the country position paper on Traditional Knowledge, one can easily identify the dissimilarities among these papers especially the definition of Traditional Knowledge.
None of the above bill define the term ‘generation’. But, these documents at many places says ‘information or knowledge passed from generation to generation’. But, The Scheduled Tribes and other Traditional Forest Dwellers (Recognition of Forest Rights) Act, 2006 says ‘generation means a period comprising of twenty five years’.
European Union’s Directive on Traditional Medicine Product Directive (TMP) which came into force from May 1, 2011 defines the traditional medicine as ‘medicine that has been used outside EU for 30 years and 15 years within the EU’.
Due to consistent inactivity of Government of India and lack of co-ordination among the Stake holders and Department of AYUSH led not only huge loss to the Indian traditional medicine exporter but also left them in lurch.
K.MUTHU SELVAM
IP ADVOCATE
Former Examiner of TM
Dear Muthu,
Very interesting points – could you please give me your email ID.
Thank you,
Prashant
Hi prashant,
my mail id is [email protected]
Thank You
K.Muthu Selvam