|
||
|
TWN
Info Service on Intellectual Property Issues (Oct17/07) Geneva, 17 October (K M Gopakumar) – The WIPO General Assembly has adopted a decision to reform the composition of the program and budget committee (PBC), following a proposal from the Asia Pacific region group of members. According to the decision, “The WIPO General Assembly decided to consider the composition of the Program Budget Committee; in this context, the chair of the IWPO General Assembly will undertake consultations on an inclusive, transparent, and effective PBC, taking into account, among other considerations, geographical representation, with a view to making a decision at the WIPO general Assembly at its fiftieth session in 2018”. The Asia Pacific Group submitted a proposal for the increase of representation from the current level of 9 to 11. In its proposal the group stated that there is disproportionate representation in the current membership of PBC (WO/GA/49/20 http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/govbody/en/wo_ga_49/wo_ga_49_20.pdf). At the moment the PBC membership consists of 53 Member States. However, the representation is not equitable and many WIPO regions are over represented. The following is the current total membership of each region and the distribution of PBC membership is in brackets – Group B of developed countries: 32 (12), Africa: 53 (12), Group of Caucasian Central Asian and Eastern European Countries: 9 (5), Central European and Baltic States (CEBS): 17 (7), Group of Latin American and Caribbean Countries (GRULAC): 33 (9), Asia Pacific Group (APG): 44 (9), China: 1 (1). This break up provided in the APG proposal shows that the Africa Group and APG are under represented. In 2007 when the PBC membership was increased from 41 to 53 every WIPO region obtained two seats each. However, when PBC membership was expanded in 2003 Africa and the APG got two seats while other regions got one seat each. The key feature of the APG proposal is universal membership so that every Member State can participate in the PBC discussion with decision making capacity. The proposal states that according to the opinion of the WIPO Legal Counsel there is no legal basis for the determination of the number of seats as well as the allocation of seats in the PBC. Further the proposal states that, “neither WIPO’s Rules of Procedure nor existing Guidelines provide a legal basis for the current limitation on neither the number of seats in the PBC, nor the allocation of seats to each regional group”. The proposal garnered the support of many developing countries including Brazil. However, the President of the Assembly said that a universal membership in the PBC may raise the issue of quorum and has the potential to incapacitate the work of the Committee in the absence of quorum. The APG proposal is reproduced below (http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/govbody/en/wo_ga_49/wo_ga_49_20.pdf). “1. The APG noted the Legal Counsel’s office explanation, during a consultation with the APG, that there were no rules Governing the overall composition or election of the PBC, And that while the PBC had grown in size from 33 to 53 Members over time, there was no legal basis for the determination of the number of PBC seats, nor the allocation to each regional group. The current allocation is not fairly proportioned and representative of the relative size of regional groups in WIPO. 2.With regard to the above, the APG is inclined to invite Regional Groups and Member States to further discuss the following: a) The PBC should be open to the full participation of all interested WIPO Members. The decisions made by the PBC – a key WIPO governing body -are directly relevant to all Members. All Members who wish to be involved should therefore be able to contribute in full, as neither WIPO’s Rules of Procedure nor existing Guidelines provide a legal basis for the current Limitation on neither the number of Seats in the PBC, nor the allocation Of seats to each regional group. b) Noting, however, that Members may need more time to consider the above, the APG proposes the following for the 2018/19 biennium: i. The APG recalls the precedent for the expansion of the PBC in 2003 and 2007. We note that when the PBC had last expanded from 41 to 53 Members in 2007, each regional group (except China) was allocated two extra seats.In2003, the APG and the African Group were allocatedone more seat than other regional groups to reflect the size of the two groupings. ii. Since the number of Members in certain regional groupings in WIPO has grown, the number of seats allocated to each Group should also be adjusted proportionately based on equal representation principle, while reaffirming that every regional group should be represented in the PBC and the Coordination Committee. (Corrected version http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/govbody/en/wo_ga_49/wo_ga_49_20_corr.pdf) [As it has been 10 years since the regional group allocations at the PBC was last considered, the APG is of the view that an expansion of the PBC Membership in line with current realities is a timely step to take. Since the number of Members in certain regional groupings in WIPO has grown, the number of seats allocated to each group should also be adjusted proportionately based on equal Representation principle.] iii. The allocation of seats in the PBC from the 2018/19 biennium should accurately reflect the WIPO Membership and relative sizes of WIPO Regional Groups, and in doing so address the imbalance in the current allocation.”+
|
||
