Implications and Challenges of Malaysia's Ratification of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge

Nazura Abdul Manap

Nazura Abdul Manap Fakulti Undang-undang, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia.

Abstract

Issues concerning the protection of genetic resources and traditional knowledge have increasingly attracted attention in international intellectual property law, particularly following the adoption of the World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) Treaty on Intellectual Property, Genetic Resources and Associated Traditional Knowledge (GRATK Treaty 2024). This treaty represents a significant achievement, as it mandates for the first time the disclosure of the origin of genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge in patent applications, in line with global efforts to curb biopiracy and to recognise the rights of Indigenous communities. As a mega-biodiverse country rich in traditional knowledge heritage, Malaysia has yet to ratify this treaty. Accordingly, this study evaluates the suitability and implications of ratification by examining gaps within the existing legal framework, including the Patents Act 1983, Copyright Act 1987, Trademarks Act 2019, Geographical Indications Act 2022, as well as national biodiversity policies. The study employs a qualitative document analysis methodology, encompassing treaty provisions, domestic legislation, policy reports, and international biopiracy case studies, such as those of neem, turmeric, basmati, and hoodia, which are comparatively analysed alongside local herbal resources, including tongkat ali and kacip fatimah. The findings indicate that ratification of the treaty has the potential to strengthen the protection of indigenous community rights, enhance alignment with international standards, and reinforce Malaysia’s geopolitical standing in global negotiations. Nevertheless, effective implementation would require legislative amendments, institutional capacity-building, the development of traditional knowledge databases, and the establishment of fair and equitable benefit-sharing mechanisms. Therefore, a comprehensive and inclusive implementation strategy is essential to ensure that Malaysia not only safeguards its biodiversity but also upholds the sovereignty of its traditional knowledge in the era of globalisation.

Keywords: Traditional knowledge, genetic resources, biopiracy, intellectual property, patent application, ratification

Full text: PDF

References

1. Akta Paten 1983 (Akta 291). (1983). International Law Book Services.
2. CBD. (1992), Convention on biological diversity, United Nations.
3. Coolsaet, B. (2013). The challenges for implementing the Nagoya Protocol in a multi-level Governance context: Lessons from the Belgian case. Resources, 2(4), 555–578.
4. Correa, C. M. (2001). Traditional knowledge and intellectual property: Issues and options surrounding the protection of traditional knowledge. Quaker United Nations Office.
5. Dutfield, G. (2017). Intellectual property, biogenetic resources and traditional knowledge. Earthscan.
6. European Patent Office. (2000). Neem oil patent, Case T 0416/01.
7. Government of Malaysia. (2014). Instrument of ratification of the Nagoya Protocol.
8. Hasnizam Abdullah. (2021). Digitalising traditional knowledge in Malaysia: Issues and challenges. Asian Journal of Intellectual Property Studies, 5(1), 21–35.
9. Kamau, E. C., & Winter, G. (2024). The WIPO genetic resources treaty: Implications for international IP law. Journal of World Intellectual Property, 27(2),
145–168.
10. Mohd Shukri Mat Ali, & Mohd Azlan Sah Mat Hassan. (2013). Commercial potential of Eurycoma longifolia (tongkat ali) in Malaysia. Journal of Tropical Forest Science, 25(3), 356–364.
11. MyIPO. (2020). Malaysia traditional knowledge digital library (MyTKDL), https://www.myipo.gov.my
12. MyIPO. (2022). Geographical indications in Malaysia. MyIPO.
13. Nagoya Protocol. (2010). Access to genetic resources and the fair and equitable sharing of benefits arising from their utilization. United Nations.
14. Natural Resources, Environment and Climate Change. (2016). Dasar kepelbagaian biologi kebangsaan 2016–2025. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment.
15. Nijar, G. S. (2011). The Nagoya Protocol on access and benefit sharing of genetic resources: Analysis and implementation options for developing countries. South Centre Research Paper No. 36.
16. Nijar, G. S. (2012). Access to genetic resources and benefit sharing in Malaysia. Third World Network.
17. Nor Hidayah Mohd Izham, Siti Hajar Adam, Nor Syaza Syahirah Amat Junaidi, Shariff Halim, Nurul Farisha Ramli, & Mohd Helmy Mokhtar. (2013). Pharmacological potentials of Labisia pumila (kacip Fatimah). Journal of Ethnopharmacology, 145(3), 681–687.
18. Noraini Abdul Rahim. (2018). Perlindungan ekspresi budaya tradisional di Malaysia. Jurnal Harta Intelek Malaysia, 3(2), 77–93.
19. Rohana Abdul Ghani. (2020). Ekspresi budaya tradisional dalam undang-undang hak cipta Malaysia: Cabaran dan prospek. Kanun: Jurnal Undang-undang Malaysia, 32(1), 45–62. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.11710.79686
20. Sangeeta Shashikant. (2019). Intellectual property and genetic resources: Challenges for the global South. Third World Resurgence, 339, 10–15.
21. USPTO. (1997). Turmeric patent case. US Patent No. 5,401,504 (reexamined).
22. Vandana Shiva. (1997). Biopiracy: The plunder of nature and knowledge. South End Press.
23. World Intellectual Property Organization. (2000). Intergovernmental Committee on Intellectual Property and Genetic Resources, Traditional Knowledge and Folklore (IGC). https://www.wipo.int/tk/en/igc/
24. World Intellectual Property Organization. (2024). Treaty on Intellectual property, genetic resources and associated traditional knowledge.
25. Wynberg, R (2004). Rhetoric, realism and benefit sharing: Use of traditional knowledge of hoodia species in the development of an appetite suppressant. Journal of World Intellectual Property, 7(6), 851–876.