Nestle accused of bio-pirating genetic resources

Patent applications

Five recent patent applications by Nestle on the use of Rooibos and Honeybush had been in conflict with both South African law and the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), Swiss non-governmental organisation the Berne Declaration, and non-profit environmental organisation Natural Justice said on Thursday.

"This second bio-piracy case in South Africa in less than a year again demonstrates how big corporations neglect their obligations to seek prior informed consent and to share benefits when using genetic resources from the developing countries as obliged by the CBD," they said.

Four of the five patents in question related to the use of Rooibos and Honeybush for the treatment of certain hair and skin conditions, they said.

Another patent claimed the use of Rooibos for the preparation of a product to prevent inflammatory disorders.

"The claims are very broad and subsequently applicable to a product range that stretches from cappuccino to salad dressing and from toothpaste to lipstick."

The applicant for the patents was Nestec SA, a subsidiary of Nestle.

Research permits

Rooibos and Honeybush were endemic to the South African Western and Eastern Cape provinces and both plants had a long tradition of use in the region, also for related medicinal purposes, the organisations said.

According to the SA Biodiversity Act - which implemented the CBD in South Africa - a company needed a permit from the government to research with commercial intent, or patent the use of, genetic resources occurring in South Africa.

"Such a permit can only be obtained if a benefit-sharing agreement has been negotiated," said the Berne Declaration and Natural Justice.

"The department of environmental affairs of SA confirmed to Natural Justice and the Berne Declaration that Nestle has never received the permits to use these South African genetic resources."

Contradicting law

It was clear the patents of Nestle and the research on which they were based contradicted South Africa law and the CBD.

Nestle held a 30.5% participation in L'Oreal (the biggest cosmetic producer worldwide) and 50% in Inneov, a joint venture with L'Oreal, "which could explain the company's interest in skin and hair care products".

'Illegal'

The organisations claimed that Nestle had built its new business on "illegally accessed material", precluding South Africans of their rightful share of benefits.

"Such illegal behaviour must no longer be supported by the patent system and tolerated by our governments," said Francois Meienberg, a member of the management board of the Berne Declaration.

Nestle was not able to comment immediately.

Source: Sapa