Can you please explain the glee over the decision of the Government of India not to challenge the patent which claims rights over wheat derived from Nap Hal? The Patent in question explicitly claims a wheat variety, and so is squarely in violation of the European Patent COnvention; and the disclosure of the patent shows that the genetic traits which are key to the patent (double null allele in glu-D1 gene) were wholly derived from the landrace developed in India, namely, Nap Hal.
So, how does this patent foster the goals of the Convention on Biological Diversity, a treaty every bit as sound as GATT? How does it foster or even allow benefit sharing to the peoples who developed the valuable double null trait? How does it not violate the articles of the European Patent COnvention? How is it any less an act of biopiracy than the Basmati patent, which the Indian government DID successfully challege??
]]>