practice of fpic

Practice of FPIC

Case study of Suriname

Vereniging van Inheemse Dorpshoofden in Suriname

What if ...

• This institution approach you as IPO and ask you to do consultation rounds with IP;

• This institutions explain IP should contribute to content of a project but this project is already drafted and approved;

• The goal of the project is to strengthen the capacity of Government to better the engagement process with IP and make FPIC an instrument used by the Government;

What if ....

• This institution is an environmental organization;

• This institution will make you partly responsible of the outcomes of their project;

What if ...

• The IPO has no good experiences with this institution, in particularly some individuals;

• The IPO is worried about the political position of the institute esp. the relation between environment and IP territories;

• The IPO stressed that capacity building of Government by IPO should be part of the implementation of R-PP.

Process of engagement

• Why were IP not approached when Project was still an idea?

• Why were other (inter) national multilateral institutions partners from start?

• Why would this institution work on Capacity Strengthening in Government re IP rights?

Mentioned in Resolution PC 14Suriname need to address, before entering into a Readiness Preparation project Document with UNDP the “collaboration with indigenous and tribal peoples representatives, in the work plan ..... a process to identify the need for and to provide capacity building in government institutions with respect to indigenous and tribal peoples issues”

Internal consultations

Information sharing meetings with chiefs only after we requested & received project data

• Why would VIDS cooperate?• What about trust?• Do we want to invest in R-PP?

Agreement based on FPIC

2nd process phase

Contract signing:• Institution’s headquarter new only 2 kinds of

contracts, and works only with consultants;• IPO’s cannot / difficult to operate as

consultant;• IPO is representing a collective group and has

no authorization to give away collective owned materials and non-materials (traditional communication systems)

• Long process with lawyers from headquarter;• VIDS still mentioned as consultant;• New wordings re ownership of institution: “......

however that any and all Indigenous and Tribal Peoples’ IP Works and Works incorporating Indigenous and Tribal Peoples’ IP Works will state that the ownership of, and all rights over Indigenous and Tribal Peoples’ intellectual property described and/or elaborated on therein belong to the respective Indigenous and Tribal Peoples

Implemention phase

• Still need for trust building between institution and VIDS – both ways –

• Limited budget to implement consultations• Time constraints• lawyers of institution created now a 3rd

option to sign contract (UNDRIP)

(PRE) conditions

• Invest in engagement processes;• Probably means invest in internal re-

organization;• Eliminate Budget & time limitations;• Use UNDRIP in implementation & need for

lawyer

THANK YOU

ASSOCIATION OF INDIGENOUS VILLAGE LEADERS IN SURINAME (VIDS)

December 2014Maria Josee Artist