How has TRIPS Agreement affected Thailand?

About 100 years ago, Thai farmers developed the ancestor of today's jasmine rice. However, it wasn't until shortly after WWII that genetic testing and manipulation of the jasmine rice seed had been perfected to suit the extremely dry growing conditions found in Isaan, a large region in Northeastern Thailand. Today, five million farmers in Isaan depend on sales of jasmine rice.

In 1993, RiceTec of Texas was granted a United States Plant Variety Protection Certificate #9000075 and an international trademark for 'Jasmati' rice. The name might suggest that it is a hybrid of Indian basmati rice and Thai jasmine rice, however, the company says that it is actually a hybrid of the American della and Italian bertone varieties. The multilateral WTO TRIPS Agreement was signed in 1994, and it wasn't until 1998 that nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) in Thailand became aware of the Jasmati trademark and informed the Thai government.

On discovering the U.S. patent, Thailand argued that RiceTec had deceived the public by adopting an Asian-sounding name that signified quality in an effort to lure consumers into believing they were being offered a cross between an Indian and Thai rice grain. Thailand alleged that the American patent was misleading and caused confusion among consumers, while damaging the good name of Thai Jasmine rice.

Thailand accused RiceTec of falsely designating the origin of its product under Article 22, referring to geographical indications, of the TRIPS Agreement. However, since the Jasmati germ plasm is not related in any way to jasmine or basmati rice, Thailand's case against the use of Jasmati by RiceTec proved to be unsuccessful.

Following their failed attempt, Thailand's Department of Foreign Trade amended the jasmine rice registration mark to 'Thai Hom Mali, originating in Thailand', in an effort to clearly distinguish between the use of 'jasmine fragrant rice' and any suggestion that such products originated in Thailand in the minds of consumers.

Thailand, the world's leading rice exporter, is concerned that TRIPS allows multinational companies to obtain ownership over locally derived seeds, biodiversity and indigenous knowledge. Moreover, Thailand is concerned that foreign companies will take advantage of the fairly simple process of adding relatively little to locally derived organisms and then calling them 'new' for the purpose of patenting. Genetically engineering rice involves little more than adding a few genes to a plant that already contains tens of thousands of genes.

Since the Jasmati case, all Thailand's Ministry of Commerce has been able to do is increase the understanding among Thai companies of the value of intellectual property rights within the framework of international trade. In 1998, the Cabinet approved a draft bill covering the protection of traditional and improved plant varieties. Since then, the country has also passed a law on geographical indications.

COMPANY	COUNTRY	# OF RICE PATENTS
Pioneer Hi-Bred International	USA	17
Mitsui-Toatsu Chemicals	JAPAN	13
Monsanto	USA	9
Japan Tobacco	JAPAN	8
Novartis	SWITZERLAND	5
Advanced Technologies	UK	4
AgrEvo	GERMANY	4
Cornell Research Foundation	USA	4
Mitsubishi / Mitsubishi Chemicals	JAPAN	4
Sumitomo Chemicals	JAPAN	4
Du Pont	USA	3
Kubota	JAPAN	3
Zeneca	UK	3
Total top 13 companies	81 patentsor - 51% of the total (160)

Renegotiation of the International Undertaking on Plant Genetic Resources for Food and Agriculture (IU) were held in Spoleto, Italy April 23-28, 2001. During this convention parties negotiated Intellectual Property Rights on genetic resources.

For questions or comments contact us