Press "Enter" to skip to content

Intellectual property has become politicised. That is why I’m a candidate to conduct WIPO

The direction race to conduct the world’s strongest intellectual property service is now a proxy war between China and the USA. This is why that is dangerous.

This Wednesday, delegates out of 83 governments across the globe are led to Geneva to vote to another head of the planet’s strongest intellectual body.

But there is a problem: that the race has become a political battleground between the candidates out of China and Singapore, threatening this prestigious organization with gridlock for the subsequent six decades. And developing nations and emerging markets — that need strong IP protection to be able to construct their markets — are caught in the center.

If either wins, we might be facing a lame duck for the planet’s most important intellectual property, changing this half-century-old organization into a political football. And I concur with them.

This could happen at an essential moment in history in which significant challenges, such as climate change and artificial intelligence, call for more intensive collaboration among its member nations. Since developing nations and emerging markets have put innovation in the center of their development policies, the safeguarding of intellectual property will be paramount.

To place this in perspective, consider NATO. A cornerstone of the NATO alliance is collective citizenship, meaning if one state is attacked all countries will come to its help.

WIPO has its very own mutual defense treaty. It is known as the Patent Cooperation treaty, ensuring global recognition of patent rights with treaty members. However, if both of those candidates take over the organization, then it is going to be effectively dead for six decades. As all WIPO delegates understand too well, it’s a challenge to receive a minimal consensus on almost any initiative.

To be able to avert this damaging foreseeable scenario for WIPO, for intellectual property and the member countries, a third manner is possible.

We want the ideal candidate to perform the job. And that is why I am running.

Along with my strong history in intellectual property, I’ve developed established diplomatic abilities and possess significant expertise in handling an intergovernmental organization. Also, I talk three official UN languages and also possess the true representation of the interests of emerging markets and developing countries in mind.

The polarisation and politicization of WIPO about two rival blocs, pitting a significant market on the 1 side and industrialized nations on the other, will marginalize the interests of developing nations and emerging markets and will relegate them to the standing of helpless hostage of the deadlock. WIPO wouldn’t fulfill its mandate if it fails to answer the valid concerns and aspirations of the vast majority of its member countries. Is this what we need for your organization?

On 4 March, don’t vote for a candidate for political motives. Vote for the continuing survival of IP. And pick the ideal candidate that will improve the business enterprise and best serve its own member countries.