Oppn to officials taking up plum posts in WTO, WIPO

Civil society groups have complained against the practice of senior commerce ministry officials taking up plum posts with international agencies such as the World Trade Organization (WTO) and World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) with whom they have been involved in direct negotiations on issues of national interest.

What triggered the protest is the recent appointment of N N Prasad, former joint secretary who was handling intellectual property issues in the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion (DIPP), as Chief De Cabinet to the secretariat of the WIPO director general.

Organisations such as the National Working Group on Patent Laws and All India Science Network feel the appointment, which happened while Prasad was negotiating India’s position on patents with WIPO, was not in the right spirit. The fact that the incumbent joint secretary who is to fill Prasad’s vacancy in DIPP is his wife — Anjali Prasad — has also been criticised.

‘This is a clear case of conflict of interest. We may not have any hard evidence to suggest any ulterior motives, but as a principle, we need to guard against the possibility of conflict of interest in sensitive areas like WTO or WIPO,” said Amit Sen Gupta, convenor of the All India Science Network.

According to Gupta, officials in charge of negotiations with multilateral bodies are supposed to protect the interest of one’s country. “In case they want to join such international agencies, there has to be at least a cooling period before he can join them,” he added.

In fact, in a letter to DIPP Secretary Ajay Shankar on April 4, Indian Pharmaceutical Alliance (IPA), the select group of leading domestic drug companies, had expressed a similar disappointment owing to India’s failure to “consolidate its position with the developing country member states” in WIPO’s standing committee meeting on the Law of Patents.

Commenting on the meeting held during March 23-27 in Geneva, the IPA letter states that “Brazil was more vocal and forthcoming, but India’s passive role has intrigued many observers in Geneva….The rumours linking India’s subdued position to appointment of a senior official from New Delhi in the Secretariat is driving a wedge between India and the rest of the developing countries. We believe that India has always maintained its dignity and not compromised its stand on key issues for any such positions….However, the rumours have compromised India’s position vis-à-vis its close allies,” the letter stated.

The developing nations, including India, are yet to agree upon several clauses suggested by WIPO. In fact, IPA says the four priorities identified by the WIPO director general for WIPO may not really have helpful implications for developing countries. “The organisational changes involving virtual abolition or dilution of programmes clustered together for deriving the economic benefits of intellectual property, redeployment of experienced and knowledgeable officials helping developing countries in legislative framework of IP, advising on TRIPS flexibilities....are indicative of the direction in which the new DG wants to take the WIPO at the cost of the developing countries,” the IPA letter points out.

The National Working Group (NWG) on Patent Laws, which intends to take up the matter at the highest level, said Prasad’s case was not an isolated case. “At least half a dozen officials have left the commerce ministry to take up jobs in WTO and WIPO. So, this should not be seen in isolation. The government should check if its rules have been flouted while granting permissions for such assignments,” a senior member of NWG on Patents said.

He also pointed out that the Department of Personnel and Training, which approves all such foreign assignment applications from senior civil servants, had in 2004 issued a directive prohibiting such assignments.

According to him, the directive says that “if an official has been dealing with an international agency in his official capacity at any time during the previous five years, he may not accept a consultancy assignment from that agency…”

An email query sent to department remained unanswered. The DIPP secretary was not reachable for comments.