SUMMARY OF THE DISCUSSION IN
THE CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE
ON THE DIRECTION OF DOMESTICMEASURES ESTABLISHED BY MOEJ

Dr. Hiroji Isozaki
Professor of Sophia University
Chair of the Consultative Committee

EFFORTS IN JAPAN
Government of Japan¾ May 11th, 2011
Signed the Protocol¾ May 21st, 2012
Agreed on the consideration of domestic
measures by relevant ministries
Advance rapidly the consideration of domestic
measures necessary for the implementation ofthe Nagoya Protocol.

¾ September 28th, 2012
Approved “The National Biodiversity
Strategy of Japan 2012-2020” by Cabinet“Aim to ratify the Nagoya Protocol on ABS as earlyas possible, and steadily put into practice theobligations found in this protocol by 2015 at thelatest.”

Consultative Committee(hosted by MOEJ)¾ Nov. 2011 - March 2012
Study Group(Twice & closed session)¾ Sept. 2012 - March 2014
ConsultativeCommittee (16 times &open session)CONSULTATIVE COMMITTEE ON THE DIRECTION
OF DOMESTIC MEASURES FOR THE
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE NAGOYA PROTOCOL¾ The aim of the committee is to consider the direction of the future
domestic measures necessary and suitable for Japan toward theearly ratification of the Protocol.
¾ The committee consists of 14 members who are ABS experts
and key persons from industry*, academia and NGOs.

(*Pharmaceutical industry, Natural medicine industry, breeding industry,food industry, cosmetic industry, etc.)¾ The outcome of the committee will be a report summarizing theviews of its members. The report will not be a kind of decision by
the Government of Japan.
¾ The report does not include views
from relevant ministries because
they are observer for the committee.

PROGRESS OF THE DISCUSSION IN THE COMMITTE#1 (Sep. 2012)- #12 (Sep. 2013)#12 (Sep. 2013)- #15 (Dec. 2013)
Dec. 27th, 2013
- Jan. 24th, 2014

• Discuss the respective issues relevant forthe domestic measures• Report on the specific issues by experts• Develop the draft report of the Committee• Invite Public Comments on the draft
report• Finalize the report (scheduled)#16 (Mar. 3rd, 2014)• The Committee will submit the report to MOEJ.
• Relevant ministries will consider the domestic measures taking into
account the report.

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

SECTION III: SUMMARY OF VIEWS ON THE
DIRECTION OF THE DOMESTIC MEASURES
1. Compliance measures(1) Principle(2) Premises for the discussion(3) Scope(4) Checkpoint(5) Effective measures for addressing non-compliance
2. Necessity for the exercise of sovereign right overgenetic resources
3. Awareness raising and support for users
4. Other issues related to the domestic measures
5. Next step for the consideration of the domestic measures

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

1. Compliance measures (1) Principle¾ Contribution to the promotion of appropriate utilization ofgenetic resources¾ Support from the relevant stakeholders in Japan andaccountability to the international society¾ Clear, simplified and practical measures¾ Consideration to the international flow of genetic resources¾ Importance of awareness raising and support for users

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

1. Compliance measures (3) Scope --GR-#1 Other Parties intended
The compliance measures should be applied to genetic
resources accessed in other Parties that develop andimplement ABS legislation or regulatory requirementsin accordance with Article 6.3 and that provide therelevant information to the ABS-CH.

#2 Temporal coverage
The compliance measures should be applied to genetic
resources accessed in an other Party after the entry into
force of the Nagoya Protocol, Japanese compliancemeasures, and ABS legislation or regulatory requirementsof the other Party.

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

1. Compliance measures(4) Checkpoint#1 Monitoring the utilization of genetic resources¾ It is not practical to monitor directly all utilization of genetic
resources dealt with in laboratories and facilities.
¾ Considering that all commercial utilization aims to develop aproduct and gain its sale profit, it would be effective to do
monitoring focusing on product commercialization.
¾ Compliance measures should incorporate a part of the ideaof EU draft regulation proposed by EC (Oct. 2012), whichurges users to declare the exercise of due diligenceobligation on the occasion of requesting market approval orat the time of commercialization, neither at the time ofaccess nor during utilization of genetic resources.

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

1. Compliance measures(4) Checkpoint#2 Collecting and providing the information¾ In case that the checkpoint requests users to submit
relevant information, the information requested
should be minimized, including those necessary toverify that a genetic resource is covered by ainternationally recognized certificate of complianceavailable in the ABS Clearing House. Submission ofother information from users should be voluntary.
¾ The information that the checkpoint makes publicly
available, including via ABS Clearing House, should
be minimized without confidence.

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

1. Compliance measures(4) Checkpoint#3 Designation of the checkpoint¾ Confirmation of compliance should be separated
from screening for market approval of products
and effectiveness of such approvals.
¾ If a ministry which has offices in charge of such
screening serves as a checkpoint, a separate
office in the ministry should have the function.

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

1. Compliance measuresnon-compliance(5) Effective measures for addressing non-compliance# Non-compliance with compliance measures(Art.15.2 and 16.2)¾ It is necessary to take appropriate, effective andproportionate measures to address situation ofnon-compliance.
¾ As for non-compliance by negligence, there
should be given for users an opportunity to rectify
the situation of non-compliance.

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

2. Necessity for the exercise of sovereign
right over genetic resources
Japan has not taken measures based on Art.15.5 of the CBD
as a provider country of genetic resources.
¾ The introduction of PIC system possibly causes cruciallyserious problems from the viewpoint of academic and industrial
activities, since PIC system can be an obstacle to rapid
exchange of genetic resources with domestic and foreign users¾ Traditional knowledge associated with genetic resources inJapan, if any, would be publically available. Accordingly, there
would be little knowledge which is specific to Japan andshould be under protection.
¾ At this point, PIC system should not be developed in Japan.
However, the consideration should be continued in preparation
for future needs along with changes in the situation.

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

3. Awareness raising and support for users#1 Awareness raising
It is crucial to spread the understanding on ABS throughraising awareness of users, especially those of businesssectors which have ultra-small, small and medium-size
enterprises.

#2 Support for users¾It is necessary to provide consultation service to give
advice for users about ABS.
¾The procedures to acquire genetic resources from
Biological Resource Centers need to be more simplified.
The government should support the efforts by such centersserving as a scientific-technological infrastructure.

Contents of the draft report at Public Comments

4. Next step for the consideration ofthe domestic measures¾As the next step after the end of consideration by theCommittee, taking into account its report, relevant
ministries, in collaboration with academia, industries,
NGOs and others, should pull together to push forward
the consideration of the domestic measures necessary
for the ratification of the Protocol.
¾Priorities should be given to surveys of specific areas
involved in the utilization of genetic resources and tounderstanding of the intention of stakeholders in order tostreamline the consideration of domestic measures.

Thank you for your attention