------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
$9.95 domain names from Yahoo!. Register anything.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/J8kdrA/y20IAA/yQLSAA/1dTolB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
from Elsbeth Vocat...thanks!
Date: Fri, 03 Dec 2004 03:16:07 -0000
De: "ngo_ip_undecade" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
14th Report on the 10th Working Group on the Draft Declaration
Greetings,
This will be a far shorter update than yesterday's (for which I am
sure many of you will be thankful!) as most of the day was spent in
informal/informal consultations and much of what was discussed
yesterday was again rehashed today.
The hunger strike and spiritual fast continued on its third day, and
there is a board outside the conference room where letters of support
continue to flow into the UN. At this point there are several
hundred and more coming in all the time. Again, to write in your
support of this action please write to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
or send a fax to 00-41-22-917-0079. It has been a remarkable thing
to watch and each of the hunger strikers has been emitting this very
strong and white light, a brilliant glow, since I saw them this
morning. They just all keep smiling and radiating peace even though
they are so hungry and feeling very weak. Amazing!
In terms of the substantive discussions, one hour was spent in the
morning to discuss Article 29 regarding intellectual property rights
of indigenous peoples as well as the concept of traditional
knowledge. The CRP1 Proposal basically deletes the existing Sub-
Commission text and replaces it with watered down and generic
language that does nothing to protect intellectual property rights
and traditional knowledge of indigenous peoples. The New Zealand
government claimed that intellectual property issues are being
addressed in 'other fora' and that it was not productive for the WGDD
to pre-empt these ongoing negotiations by outlining this right. IITC
took the floor to focus on the statement made by New Zealand, and
stated that although it went unsaid in the government comments, what
they appeared to be alluding to is that the WTO will be dealing with
these issues. IITC noted how inappropriate it would be for a body
such as the WTO to be outlining rights on these issues with their
policy of supporting western corporations in copyright regimes much
to the detriment of indigenous traditional knowledge and intellectual
property issues. The Saami Council further noted that the WTO and
WIPO will not be addressing these issues crucial to indigenous
peoples from a human rights standpoint and this of course
problematizes the issue. The Saami Council further noted that they
can not agree with the Sub-Commission text as from a legal standpoint
there is no definition of 'cultural and intellectual property' in
regards to indigenous peoples. They pointed out that the CRP5 text
presented by their Council as well as Tebtebba clarified this point
and this was the text they supported. The Asian Caucus noted their
support of CRP5 but stated as well that aspects of CRP4 could also be
acceptable to them. Other groups that supported CRP5 were Mililani
Trask and ICC on the basis that the terms 'intellectual property' had
more to do with western copyright regimes (WIPO and WTO) and the
term 'traditional knowledge' was more appropriate in terms of
protection of indigenous peoples rights regarding this issue.
Tebtebba further clarified that the term 'intellectual property
protection' is problematic in the context of WIPO and WTO (after
numerous consultations with both international organizations) because
these issues are based on western copyright systems that do not have
anything to do with human rights or the protection of indigenous
peoples, rather this term protects corporations, et al who would be
using indigenous peoples traditional knowledge and marketing it.
Tebtebba would like to see the CHR and PF define what is 'cultural
heritage' as indigenous peoples' systems challenge the western
intellectual property regimes.
Guatemala and SUANPA made new proposals for this article, but SUANPA
also supported CRP5 text.
Willie Littlechild made a proposal to add indigenous sports and games
specifically to the list of intellectual property issues listed
within Article 29.
IWA, FAIRA, Brasil, Treaty 6 Confederation, and AIR Trust all
supported the text as it stand in the Sub-Commission version.
The rest of the day was spent in informal/informal discussions
regarding the issues of self-determination, lands and territories and
treaties. The lands and territories discussions basically mirrored
the discussions from yesterday but more proposals emerged as well as
a proposal from ILRC that was supported by the USA. They continued
debating the issue of redress/restitution/reparation among other
language that many States find problematic. The self-determination
discussions were closed to the public and were only for those who had
put forward proposals in order to consolidate the many proposals into
one or two main ones to be presented to Mr. Chavez. The discussion
on Article 36 regarding treaties also was debating very particular
language as well as a new proposal from indigenous peoples that is
borrowed from language of the OAS.
This is all I have to say for today and I will be back tomorrow with
further updates.
In the spirit of Tony Black Feather,
Sezin
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Nat-International/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
