DOCSLIB.ORG

The Governance of the World Intellectual Property Organization: a Reference Guide

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Governance of the World Intellectual Property Organization: a Reference Guide A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Deere Birkbeck, Carolyn Working Paper The governance of the World Intellectual Property Organization: A reference guide GEG Working Paper, No. 2014/93 Provided in Cooperation with: University of Oxford, Global Economic Governance Programme (GEG) Suggested Citation: Deere Birkbeck, Carolyn (2014) : The governance of the World Intellectual Property Organization: A reference guide, GEG Working Paper, No. 2014/93, University of Oxford, Global Economic Governance Programme (GEG), Oxford This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/196353 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu Updated 26 MarchMay 2015 2015 The Global Economic Governance Programme University of Oxford The Governance of the World Intellectual Property Organization: A Reference Guide Carolyn Deere Birkbeck* Abstract The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the multilateral system’s key agency charged with intellectual property (IP). This working paper is the first of two documents prepared as background for a political analysis of WIPO’s governance and reform debates. This first paper presents an overview of the core components of WIPO’s governance system, described in practical, readily-accessible terms for policymakers and stakeholders in the form of a factual reference guide. The second paper provides a chronological review of governance discussions at WIPO since 1967, as well as actions taken by Member States and the Secretariat to date. The third paper offers a political assessment of WIPO’s governance and reform efforts, critically reviewing the power politics and dynamics of governance. After presenting a framework for analysing WIPO’s governance system, this paper reviews the origins of WIPO and sets out its current functions and activities, as well as the leadership, size and structure of the Secretariat. The core of the paper identifies and examines the core components of WIPO’s current governance system in five thematic areas: mandate and legal foundations; decision-making structures, processes and practices for Member State representation; financial arrangements (e.g., income sources and budget process); accountability mechanisms (i.e., for oversight, audit and evaluation); and transparency and external relations. The paper highlights that WIPO’s financial model is unique among UN organisations: the organization relies almost entirely on self-financing, raising revenue from private sector fees in exchange for treaty-related services rather than from Member State contributions. The paper also shows that while the WIPO Secretariat is a core subject of WIPO’s formal governance structure, it is also an actor in the wider governance system that impact what the organisation does and how. * Senior Researcher, GEG. The author thanks Ahmed Abdel-Latif and participants in the Global Economic Governance Programme’s research group for their input, particularly Emily Jones, Taylor St John and Geoffrey Gertz. She is also grateful for editorial and research assistance from Catherine Saez, Iveta Cherneva, Emma Burnett, and Alexa Zeitz, and archival assistance from Lise Macleod at the WIPO Library. The paper benefited from feedback from an informal dialogue with officials from WIPO, a number of WIPO Member States, and experts hosted by the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development in March 2015, where a draft of this paper was distributed. The author thanks Edward Kwakwa, WIPO’s Legal Counsel, for his feedback and clarification of several aspects of WIPO’s governance system, and to Christine Castro Hublin, Head of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Section within the Office of WIPO’s Legal Counsel. The Secretariat of WIPO assumes no liability or responsibility with regard to the transformation of data provided by WIPO. For comments or feedback, please contact: [email protected]. ** This working paper forms the basis for a forthcoming book to be published by Edward Elgar in March 2016. The book elaborates and supplements the analysis provided here, updating information for the status at the end of 2015, and also includes numerous appendices. The Global Economic Governance Programme, co-hosted by University College and the Blavatnik School of Government, is directed by Ngaire Woods. Page 1 of 66 The Governance of the World Intellectual Property Organization: A Reference Guide – Carolyn Deere Birkbeck © November 2014/ GEG WP93 The Global Economic Governance Programme University of Oxford Table of Contents INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................... 4 PART 1. ANALYSING WIPO’S GOVERNANCE ..................................... 8 PART 2: WHAT IS WIPO AND WHAT DOES IT DO? ........................... 13 2.1 WIPO’s origins ................................................................................................................................ 13 2.2 What is WIPO’s purpose? .............................................................................................................. 13 2.3 What does WIPO do in practice? ................................................................................................... 14 2.4 The WIPO Secretariat .................................................................................................................... 19 2.4.1 Leadership and staffing ........................................................................................................... 20 2.4.2 Headquarters and external offices ........................................................................................... 23 2.4.3 Internal organisation ................................................................................................................ 24 PART 3. WIPO’S GOVERNANCE SYSTEM .......................................... 25 3.1. WIPO’s mandate and legal foundations ........................................................................................ 25 3.1.1. The WIPO Convention ............................................................................................................ 25 3.1.2. Agreement between the United Nations and WIPO ............................................................... 26 3.1.3. The WIPO Development Agenda: a key decision relevant to debates on WIPO’s mandate . 26 3.2. WIPO’s decision-making structure, processes, and practices ...................................................... 27 3.2.1. WIPO’s complex governance structure .................................................................................. 27 The main organs ........................................................................................................................... 28 The annual WIPO Assemblies and the Governing Bodies of the Unions ..................................... 32 WIPO Committees and other subsidiary bodies ........................................................................... 33 Expert committees established by treaty provisions ..................................................................... 36 Working groups ............................................................................................................................ 36 Diplomatic conferences ................................................................................................................ 36 Mechanisms for coordination across committees ......................................................................... 38 3.2.2. Decision-making procedures, working methods and processes ............................................ 39 WIPO General Rules of Procedure .............................................................................................. 39 Special Rules of Procedure .......................................................................................................... 40 Voting and consensus .................................................................................................................. 41 3.2.3. Processes for rule-making: treaties and soft law .................................................................... 43 3.2.4. Regional groups ..................................................................................................................... 44 3.2.5. Role of the Secretariat in Member State deliberations ........................................................... 46 3.2.6. Practices for Member State
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Assemblies of the Member States of WIPO
    A/60/3 ORIGINAL: ENGLISH DATE: MAY 29, 2020 Assemblies of the Member States of WIPO Sixtieth Series of Meetings Geneva, May 7 and 8, 2020 GENERAL REPORT adopted by the Assemblies 1. This General Report records the deliberations and decisions of the following three Assemblies of the Member States of WIPO (Assemblies of WIPO): (1) WIPO General Assembly, fifty-second (28th extraordinary) session (2) Paris Union Assembly, fifty-fifth (31st extraordinary) session (3) Berne Union Assembly, forty-ninth (25th extraordinary) session, meeting on May 7 and 8, 2020, conducted in the form of a written procedure. 2. The list of the States members of the Assemblies concerned and the observers admitted to their sessions as of March 6, 2020, is set forth in document A/60/INF/1. 3. The meeting was presided over by the Chair of the WIPO General Assembly, Ambassador Omar Zniber (Mr.) (Morocco). CONDUCT OF THE MEETING IN THE FORM OF A WRITTEN PROCEDURE 4. The Sixtieth series of meetings of the Assemblies of WIPO was convened by the Director General of WIPO, Mr. Francis Gurry. 5. Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, and related public health restrictions, including Host State prohibitions on public gatherings of more than five people, an in-person meeting of the Assemblies of WIPO was not possible. In this context, as noted by the Director General of WIPO, the challenges faced by the international community at this time were unprecedented. Consequently, the Director General of WIPO necessarily proposed an equally unprecedented A/60/3 page 2 written procedure that would allow the Assemblies of WIPO to take relevant decisions at their May meeting for the successful discharge of their treaty obligations as part of the process of the election of the Director General (see Note A/60/C.
    [Show full text]
  • GEG WP 93 the Governance of the World Intellectual Property
    Updated 26 MarchMay 2015 2015 The Global Economic Governance Programme University of Oxford The Governance of the World Intellectual Property Organization: A Reference Guide Carolyn Deere Birkbeck* Abstract The World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) is the multilateral system’s key agency charged with intellectual property (IP). This working paper is the first of two documents prepared as background for a political analysis of WIPO’s governance and reform debates. This first paper presents an overview of the core components of WIPO’s governance system, described in practical, readily-accessible terms for policymakers and stakeholders in the form of a factual reference guide. The second paper provides a chronological review of governance discussions at WIPO since 1967, as well as actions taken by Member States and the Secretariat to date. The third paper offers a political assessment of WIPO’s governance and reform efforts, critically reviewing the power politics and dynamics of governance. After presenting a framework for analysing WIPO’s governance system, this paper reviews the origins of WIPO and sets out its current functions and activities, as well as the leadership, size and structure of the Secretariat. The core of the paper identifies and examines the core components of WIPO’s current governance system in five thematic areas: mandate and legal foundations; decision-making structures, processes and practices for Member State representation; financial arrangements (e.g., income sources and budget process); accountability mechanisms (i.e., for oversight, audit and evaluation); and transparency and external relations. The paper highlights that WIPO’s financial model is unique among UN organisations: the organization relies almost entirely on self-financing, raising revenue from private sector fees in exchange for treaty-related services rather than from Member State contributions.
    [Show full text]
  • 7 CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1.Conceptual Framework 2.1.1
    CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW 2.1.Conceptual Framework 2.1.1. Conceptual Framework of Copyright 2.1.1.1. Definition of Copyright Based On Indonesian Law In the Indonesian aspect, copyright is divided into two words, “hak” and “cipta.” Based on Indonesian Dictionary (KBBI), the word “hak” (translation: “right”) means own, belonging; authority, sovereignty; the authority to do something (as obligated by law, rules, and many other regulations); the right administration to do or demand something,1 while the word “cipta” (translation: create; invent) itself means the mind’s ability to create something new; creative thoughts.2 The definition of copyright based on the Indonesian Dictionary is someone’s right upon his/her work protected by law. As one of the intellectual property right, Indonesian Law Article 1 Number 1 Law Number 28 of 2014 about Copyright has also defined copyright as below: “Copyright means an exclusive right of the author vested automatically on the basis of declaratory principle after Works are embodied in a tangible form without reducing by virtue of restrictions in accordance with the provisions of laws and regulations.” Indonesian Law acknowledged someone as an Author if they meet the general provision according to Article 1 Number 2 as quoted below: “Author means a person or several persons who individually or jointly produce works that are unique and personal.” Based on this legal statement provided by the law, we can conclude that as long as the law acknowledged the person as someone who produces the unique and personal work, they are considered as an author 1 Translated from Anonymous, “Arti kata hak”, https://kbbi.web.id/hak, accessed in 5th August 2019.
    [Show full text]
  • UN.Today.Pdf
    DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INFORMATION The United Nations Today asdf United Nations New York, 2008 Note: Every effort is made to keep basic information current up to the date of publication, including responsible officials, contact information, treaty ratifications, etc. All other data is current as of July 2007, unless stated otherwise. Published by the United Nations Department of Public Information Printed by the Publishing Section/DGACM United Nations Headquarters New York, NY 10017 www.un.org ISBN 978-92-1-101160-9 United Nations Publication Sales No. E.08.I.6 Copyright © 2008 United Nations iii Preamble to the Charter of the United Nations We the peoples of the United Nations determined to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom, and for these ends to practice tolerance and live together in peace with one another as good neighbours, and to unite our strength to maintain international peace and security, and to ensure, by the acceptance of principles and the institution of methods, that armed force shall not be used, save in the common interest, and to employ international machinery for the promotion of the economic and social advancement of all peoples, have resolved to combine our efforts to accomplish these aims.
    [Show full text]
  • The Arbitrability of International Intellectual Property Disputes
    The Arbitrability of International Intellectual Property Disputes By William Granthamt Arbitration is the leading form of international commercial dispute resolu- tion. However, public policy may be invoked to make certain subject matter inarbitrable. This article deals with one of these putatively inarbitrable areas: intellectual property. It examines from the point of view of general policy the question of whether, and if so, to what extent, there are limits on the subject matter of intellectual property disputes that may be regulated by arbitration. In addition, it surveys the current state of the law on the arbitrability of interna- tional intellectual property disputes in a selection of countries. I. INTRODUCTION ......................................... 175 II. ARBITRABILITY AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ...... 179 A. Public Policy Considerations ............................ 179 1. The Development of Objective Arbitrability .......... 179 2. The Public Policy Elements of Intellectual Property ... 180 a. The Intellectual Property Problem ............... 180 i. Intellectual Property Arbitration as an Agent of Public Policy ............................ 185 ii. Intellectual Property Arbitration as an Exercise of a Contractual Waiver of Legal Rights ..... 186 3. Arbitrability in Practice-ICC Case No. 6097 ........ 188 B. Stages of Application of Public Policy ................... 189 1. The Policy of the Jurisdiction Whose Law Governs the Arbitration Agreement .............................. 190 2. The Policy of the Place of Arbitration ............... 192 3. The Policy of the Place of Enforcement of the Arbitral A w ard ............................................ 193 C. Intellectual Property Arbitration in Practice ............... 195 t J.D. Boalt Hall School of Law, University of California at Berkeley, 1996; B.A. University of Liverpool, 1979; M.Phil. University of Oxford, 1981. This article arises from research carried out while working as a consultant at the Arbitration Center of the World Intellectual Property Organiza- tion (WIPO) in Geneva in 1995.
    [Show full text]
  • COUNCIL Thirty-First Ordinary Session Geneva, October 29, 1997
    C/31/16 ORIGINAL: English DATE: October 29, 1997 INTERNATIONAL UNION FOR THE PROTECTION OF NEW VARIETIES OF PLANTS GENEVA COUNCIL Thirty-First Ordinary Session Geneva, October 29, 1997 RECORD OF THE DECISIONS ADOPTED IN THE SESSION adopted by the Council Introduction 1. The Council of the International Union for the Protection of New Varieties of Plants (UPOV) held its thirty-first ordinary session in Geneva on October 29, 1997, under the chairmanship of Mr. Bill Whitmore (New Zealand). 2. The Council took the decisions recorded below, under each relevant agenda item. 3. The draft report on the session will be submitted to the next session of the Council for adoption. Adoption of the Report on the Thirtieth Ordinary Session 4. The Council adopted the report as given in document C/30/17 Prov. C/31/16 page 2 Appointment of the New Secretary-General 5. The Council: (a) unanimously decided to appoint Dr. Kamil Idris as Secretary-General of UPOV, effective December 1, 1997, (b) noted with appreciation that the new Secretary-General did not wish to receive an indemnity from UPOV, and (c) decided that the program and budget for the 1998-99 biennium should be so amended that the resulting saving be used for financing activities of interest particularly to developing countries. 6. The Council paid tribute to the contribution of Dr. Arpad Bogsch to the installation, working and development of the Union over the last twenty-four years. 7. The acceptance speech of Dr. Kamil Idris is attached as Annex I to this document. The speech of Dr.
    [Show full text]
  • PCT NEWSLETTER No. 10/2008
    PCT NEWSLETTER PATENT COOPERATION TREATY www.wipo.int/pct/en October 2008 | No. 10/2008 Assemblies of the Member States of WIPO The Assemblies of the member States of WIPO, including the 38th session of the Assembly of the PCT Union, were held in Geneva from 22 to 30 September 2008. Appointment of new Director General Following his nomination by the WIPO Coordination Committee on 13 May 2008, the WIPO General Assembly appointed Mr. Francis Gurry, on 22 September 2008, as Director General of WIPO for a six-year term that began on 1 October. Mr. Gurry, a national of Australia, is the fourth Director General of WIPO, following Georg Bodenhausen of the Netherlands (1970-1973), Arpad Bogsch of the United States of America (1973-1997) and Kamil Idris of Sudan (1997-2008). Representatives of the WIPO member States congratulated Mr. Gurry on his appointment and highlighted his wealth of experience in intellectual property and the professionalism that he brings to this position. Mr. Francis Gurry, WIPO’s new Director General Prior to joining WIPO, Mr. Gurry practiced law and held a number of academic positions. Mr. Gurry has held a number of positions since he joined WIPO in 1985, his latest one being Deputy Director General responsible, inter alia, for the PCT – his full curriculum vitae is available at: http://www.wipo.int/edocs/mdocs/govbody/en/wo_ga_36/wo_ga_36_1.pdf In his acceptance speech, Mr. Gurry highlighted the importance of the patent system as well as the problems which had been brought on by its own success, and expressed the belief that the PCT provides a better basis for constructing a solution to those problems than any other solution under consideration or in the range of current imagination.
    [Show full text]
  • Valuing Intellectual Capital, Multinationals and Taxhavens Springer Verlag 2013
    Collected References, available on-line as <i.Stanford.edu/VIC/allVICcitations.pdf> 27-Oct-13 References for: Gio Wiederhold: Valuing Intellectual Capital, Multinationals and Taxhavens Springer Verlag 2013 VIC Citations This list includes all the references cited, as well as others that I have persused. For general information, I chose a recent publication for citation, trusting that it will be easier to locate and cite earlier work. As is common in tax matters, opinions abound. Refereed material is italicized. Entries cited and listed in the Reference section of Valuing Intelectual Capital have [bold identifiers]; entries considered, but not cited are marked ‡. Entries marked † were used for [W:06] . Transcription into the spreadsheet for VIC are marked [xls/worksheet]. Shaded text is to be omitted in publication, but helpful for search or as an aide de memoire. I am dding {chapter.section} references AAAAAAA [Aaron:13B] Henry J. Aaron: Tax Reform? Between a Rock and a Hard Place; Huffington Post, Brookings, 15 Jan. 2013. The 1986 reforms shifted $1T (adjusted) from individuals to Corportations over 10 years. Mobility of capital and the proliferation of multinatinal companies prevents such a solution now. Must raise personal income tax.{VIC Ch10.7.4} [Aaron:13G] Henry J. Aaron: You Get What You Pay For: Lessons From the IRS Scandal; Brookings, 31 May 2013. Only 1% of returns is audited. $450B is uncollected. Each dollar spent auditing yields $8. {VIC Ch8,7.3} [AbahoonieA:10]‡ Edward Abahoonie and Liah Alfonso: Deferred taxes on foreign earnings: A road map; Price Waterhouse Coopers (PwC), Dec.2010, updated 2012 www.pwc/us/tax.
    [Show full text]
  • 1. the Foundation of the World Intellectual Property Organization: What Came Before Gillian Davies and Sam Ricketson
    1. The foundation of the World Intellectual Property Organization: what came before Gillian Davies and Sam Ricketson ORIGINS In formal terms, WIPO was constituted by the provisions of a multilateral treaty negotiated in Stockholm in July 1967. This was signed by 51 countries from the developed and developing worlds and the former socialist bloc,1 and came into force formally on 26 April 1970, with the required number of accessions and ratifications by countries that were members of the Paris Union (10) and of the Berne Union (7). By the end of 1970, there were 22 member states, with a somewhat larger number (31) taking advantage of a provisional or transitional membership that was availa- ble for the first five years of the Organization’s existence. At the time of writing, there are 193 member states, and the Organization occupies impressive premises in Geneva, with a number of ‘External Offices’ around the world,2 and a staff establish- ment of over 1,500. It has been a specialized agency of the UN since 1974 and is now a well-established and mature member of the international institutional legal order. The creation of an international body such as WIPO was hardly a surprise and had been anticipated for some time. For more than a decade prior to 1967, there had been ongoing discussions and debates concerning the need for a new, modernized struc- ture to take over the administration of the various ‘traditional’ intellectual property conventions, such as the Paris and Berne Conventions. A further issue was meeting the challenges of the new world order that was emerging with the post-World War II process of decolonization and the development of the UN system of international organizations.
    [Show full text]
  • Charting a Course of TRIPS Patent Protection in a Fair and Balanced
    Innovation as Capability and Freedom: Charting a Course of TRIPS Patent Protection in a Fair and Balanced Global Innovation System Sa Yu Thesis submitted to the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the Doctor of Laws (LL.D.) degree Faculty of Law University of Ottawa © Sa Yu, Ottawa, Canada, 2013 Table of Contents Abstract ......................................................................................................................................... vii Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................................... viii Chapter One: Introduction ............................................................................................................... 1 1.1 TRIPS in an Innovation and Development Context ....................................................... 1 1.2 A Two-Pronged Approach to Innovation and Development ....................................... 10 1.2.1 Innovation Capability Approach to Development ................................................ 11 1.2.2 Ensuring Equal Innovation Opportunity and the Freedom to Innovate ................ 13 1.2.3 Integrating TRIPS into a Fair and Balanced Global Innovation System .............. 14 1.3 Research Methodology ................................................................................................. 16 1.4 Thesis Structure ............................................................................................................ 17 Chapter
    [Show full text]
  • Trevor Baylis, Inventor: the Clockwork Radio
    GENEVA – JUNE 2006 – No.3 2 WORLD IP DAY ROUND-UP 12 COPYRIGHT IN COURT THE SPIRIT OF INVENTION 14 The Intellectual Property-Conscious Nation: Mapping the Path from Developing to Developed By Kamil Idris and Hisamitsu Arai This contribution to the international debate on global development challenges, writ- ten by WIPO Director General Kamil Idris and former Commissioner of the Japanese Patent Office Hisamitsu Arai, was published by WIPO in May. Taking as their starting point the UN Millennium Development Goals, the authors set out their vision of how the judicious use of the intellectual property (IP) system can best contribute to the achievement of those goals. Their concern is to address “one of the weakest links” in the economic development strategies of many developing About the authors countries, namely a failure to integrate policies designed to promote IP and innova- Kamil Idris, Director General of WIPO, tion into other key development policies, such as those governing health, education, was a professor of law and a diplomat in the Sudanese foreign service before trade, environment and science and technology. joining the Organization. He studied law, political science and international Aimed at policy-makers as well as a broad, non-expert audience, the book bases its affairs in Egypt, Sudan, the USA and appeal on the wealth of examples used to illustrate its message rather than on de- Switzerland. tailed economic analysis. IP success stories – and failures – drawn from developed Hisamitsu Arai is Secretary-General of and developing countries the world over offer the reader inspiration and instruction. the Intellectual Property Headquarters at the Cabinet Secretariat of the Japanese The strong personal and professional commitment of both authors to the promotion government.
    [Show full text]
  • WO/GA/XXI/13 ORIGINAL: English WIPO DATE: October 1, 1997
    WO/GA/XXI/13 ORIGINAL: English WIPO DATE: October 1, 1997 WORLD INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY ORGANIZATION GENEVA WIPO GENERAL ASSEMBLY Twenty-First Session (13th Ordinary) Geneva, September 22 to October 1, 1997 REPORT adopted by the General Assembly 1. The General Assembly was concerned with the following items of the Consolidated Agenda (document AB/XXXI/1 Prov.2): 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, 17, 21, 23, 24, 27, 28, 29 and 30. 2. The report on the said items, with the exception of items 4, 7, 8, 9, 15, 16, 17, 23, 24 and 27 is contained in the General Report (document AB/XXXI/12). 3. Ms. Sheila Batchelor, Chair of the General Assembly, presided over the meetings of the General Assembly. n:\postoff\menezes\govbody\wga21e13.doc WO/GA/XXI/13 page 2 ITEM 4 OF THE CONSOLIDATED AGENDA: APPOINTMENT OF THE NEW DIRECTOR GENERAL 4. The Chair of the General Assembly, Ms. Sheila Batchelor (Canada), noted that paragraph 5 of document WO/GA/XXI/1 was divided into two parts. With the consent of the Assembly, she announced that the General Assembly would deal initially only with the first part of paragraph 5 inviting the General Assembly to act upon the nomination of the WIPO Coordination Committee. With respect to the second part of the paragraph, the Chair noted that the WIPO Convention provided, in Article 9(3), that the Director General shall be appointed for a fixed term, which shall be not less than six years. The General Assembly would return to the term and conditions of the appointment after consultations among the Group Coordinators.
    [Show full text]