A Report on the Training on National Legislation on ...nbaindia.org/uploaded/pdf/SAARC_Report.pdf · Afghanistan Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Pakistan SriLanka A Report

Afghanistan

Bangladesh

Bhutan

India

Maldives

Nepal

Pakistan

SriLanka

A Report on the Training on

National Legislation on Biodiversity for

Government officials of SAARC Member States

Three day training on “National Legislation on Biodiversity for Government officials of South

Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC) Member States” was held from 29th to

31st August, 2012, at Hotel Radisson Blu, Mamallapuram. 32 delegates including 11 from

different State Biodiversity Boards (SBBs) and one representative from Bangladesh took part in

the training which was organized by the Ministry of Environment and Forests, Govt., of India in

collaboration with National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), Chennai.

Objective

The objective of this training was to strengthen the collaboration between India and the other

SAARC Member States, on issues relating to environment, biodiversity, effective

implementation of the provisions of Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and on preparing

for the Conference of the Parties (COP) 11 to CBD. Further it aimed to provide an opportunity

for CBD focal points and legal experts within the SAARC region to interact and exchange

experiences and identify suitable sub-regional programmes.

Ten workshop sessions based mainly on experiences from experts in the field of environment

and biodiversity related policy and legal issues: Intellectual Property Rights (IPRs), Traditional

Knowledge (TK) and Access and Benefit Sharing (ABS) were conducted.

PRESENTATION ON INDIA’S BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY ACT, 2002 AND BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY RULES,

2004:

Shri.C.Achalender Reddy, Secretary, National Biodiversity Authority (NBA), Chennai, spoke

about India’s biodiversity, institutions and laws and the close link between biodiversity and

livelihood. He discussed how India had become a State party to the CBD and the subsequent

enactment of the Biological Diversity Act, 2002. He elaborated on the birth of National

Biodiversity Authority (NBA) and the development of new concepts such as People’s

Biodiversity Registers (PBRs), ABS (PIC, MAT, MTA) etc. He emphasized the importance of

PIC in recognising the rights of the local people and the conservation of traditional knowledge.

He discussed the implementation of the Act - through a three tiered institutional structure with

NBA at the national level, SBBs at the state level and Biodiversity Management Committees

(BMCs) at local level, describing in detail the mandates of NBA and about the penalties and

offences under the Act in comparison with the forest and wild life protection legislations.

He elaborated on the composition,

functions and operational mechanisms of

NBA, especially its operation with the

assistance of expert committees on ABS,

Agro biodiversity, Normally Traded

Commodities (NTC), Medicinal Plants

and others. Other initiatives and

programs of NBA were discussed viz.,

NIUCBD, Taxonomy Expert Database,

FRLHT, UNDP, WII, which it undertakes with other organisations.

The role of central government in establishing NBA, developing strategies, plans, programmes

etc., for biodiversity, issuing directives to the state governments for conservation of threatened

habitats, were also dealt with in his address.

Status of progress for the period upto July 2012 was presented and he discussed about the role

of state governments in establishing SBBs and constituting BMC’s. The new concept of

conservation called Biodiversity Heritage Sites (BHS) was appraised and he stated that sacred

groves can be identified in the state by SBBs and with BMC’s involvement, declare it as a BHS.

As of date 4 BHS have been notified he stated.

He also discussed the progress made in clarifying the interpretation of guidelines on

international collaborative research projects, online expert database, ABS mechanism: its

process and progress.

Before enactment of the Act – Kani story –TBGRI model had served as good ABS model, he

emphasized.

He also discussed the key challenges faced to strengthen the mandates of NBA, including

framing of guidelines for BMCs through a committee constituted for the same.

The importance of conservation activities in the high sensitive biodiversity area of Andaman and

Nicobar Islands was stressed.

PRESENTATION ON ISSUES, CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE ON THE

LEGISLATIVE FRAMEWORK ON BIODIVERSITY: Dr.M.K.Ramesh, Professor at the National Law School of India University, Bangalore, said that

CoP 11 was a lifetime opportunity for those who were engaged in negotiation deliberations and

that it was an opportunity to make policies at the global level.

He further added that the Parties to CBD make an attempt to

mainstream the legal policies at the higher level, flag the issues

and take tentative steps to ensure a particular level of

compliance and set the agenda for future, which will limit the

focus of attention.

He spoke on issues on sustainable resources, primarily

concerned about conservation of resources, conservation of

values and knowledge system, issues of bio-safety from alien

invasive species and from LMOs and GMOs, bio-piracy, dealing

effectively with injustice and equal trade.

He discussed international and national legal responses and strategies including principle of

precaution, co-operation, public trust doctrine and equity; conservation strategies including in

situ & ex situ, heritage site tag, forest and wild life conservation areas/protection of endangered

species, critical wildlife habitats, bio-safety and protocol concerning LMO’s and GMO’s with

regard to Invasive alien species.

CoP 9 decisions on global strategy for plant conservation, regional rearrangements,

international co-operation, GEF & World Bank’s financial and technical assistance were

discussed.

Regional strategies for CoP 11 to showcase achievements such as HST for Western Ghats,

involvement of Forest Rights Act in protecting community rights and wild life habitats, approval

of an expert for BT Brinjal by the Supreme Court, prevention of encroachment of conservation

areas, need for harmony to be maintained and documentation of the XII Plan, were discussed.

1 Prof: Dr.M.K. Ramesh

He opined that NBA cannot work in isolation and that it needs support and co-operation from

other agencies. He proposed measures to strengthen CBD regime.

He put forth the target subscriptions of state agreement with respect to legal framework and

suggested that law should be prescriptive and cognitive. He also stated that a beginning can be

made with CoP 11 as efforts should start there to bring into force primary principles of law.

He stated that by bringing concerns complementary to each other a legal action plan could be

evolved just like in the case of Forest Rights Act. He further added that formulatory laws are

existing; however have to be worked out in detail, even though they cannot be precise. Atleast

an attempt has to be made, he said. He opined that the definition of PIC should include

elements of “free consent” and should not merely refer to equality between parties, rather to do

equity to people.

While detailing on Bio-Safety Protocol, he stressed on introduction of safeguards while the

commerce is also done at the same time. He suggested in evolving better internal legal

mechanisms to ensure compliance. He concluded by stressing on the need for co-ordination

and harmony amongst various legislations on environment, biodiversity, industrialization etc.,

and to bring about reforms in laws that work in conflict with or overlap and override biodiversity.

PRESENTATION ON ISSUES ON NAGOYA PROTOCOL:

Prof.L.Pushpa Kumar from Delhi University delivered a presentation on issues relating to

Nagoya Protocol. He said that Nagoya Protocol ought to be healthy for certain countries as it

ensures equity for the people who preserve traditional knowledge. Implementing challenges with

special reference to developed countries are given more importance and the objective of the

Protocol covers a wide range of issues, he said.

He highlighted, Article 5 and 6 that deal with fair and

equitable benefit sharing and related issues and access to

genetic resources respectively. Further, He explained

Article 7 which provides access to Traditional Knowledge

associated with Prior Informed Consent (PIC) and MAT

(Mutually Agreed Terms) and also disclosed the necessity

to ensure that local communities are benefited through ABS

agreements and the need of capacity building training on

such issues. He spoke on Article 8 that highlights the

special considerations to promote biological resources and

also emphasized that the genetic resources related to food

and agriculture should be given equal importance. He

elaborated Article 9 that deals with Conservation initiatives

and Article 11 which explains about the trans-boundary

cooperation.

He also emphasized the specific check points that had to be recognized to monitor the flow of

genetic resources and traditional knowledge, like some of the major check points identified that

may include NBA, NBPGR. He said “they should be oriented with values of importance, creating

linkages with other agencies. User country obligations are essential to access and utilize

genetic resources. India serves best example for user as well as provider country. If training on

capacity building and issues on implementing the law is effectively done then the country’s

development would gradually increase. Civil society groups should also be involved to educate

people. In addition, legal practitioners, patent agents, private institutes should also be actively

involved.”

2 Dr. L. Pushpakumar

PRESENTATION ON BANGLADESH BIODIVERSITY POLICES AND LAWS:

Mr. Md. Majibur Rahman, Senior

Assistant Secretary, Law and Justice

Division, Ministry of Law, Justice and

Parliamentary Affairs, Bangladesh

initiated the session stating that

biodiversity has become a global

concern and that it is essential to

conserve the threatened biodiversity

adopting various programmes and

strategies both at national and regional

levels. He said “Governments

throughout the world have been

strengthening their conservation

capacity by developing and adopting various policies, legislations and innovative approaches.”

He extended his statement saying that Bangladesh is the world’s largest deltaic region

encompassing about 5,700 species of angiosperms that include 68 woody legume species, 130

fiber yielding species, 500 medicinal species, 29 orchid species and 3 species of gymnosperms.

Apart,from the above, he added that 1,700 pteridophyte species have also been recorded from

the country.

He stated that the country also possesses a rich faunal diversity and has approximately 113

species of mammals, more than 628 species of birds (both passerine and non-passerine), 126

species of reptiles, 22 species of amphibians, 708 species of marine and freshwater fish, 2,493

species of insects, 19 species of mites, 164 species of algae (or seaweed) and 4 species of

echinoderms.

He pointed out that like in other regions around the globe, the biodiversity of Bangladesh is also

entering through a critical period. Already, 12 wildlife species have become extinct from the

country. In addition, IUCN (2000) has listed a total of 40 inland mammal species, 41 bird

species, 58 reptiles and 8 amphibians under various degrees of risk in the country, and the

Bangladesh National Herbarium reported 106 vascular plant species under risk of various

degrees of extinction in the country.

He further stated that Bangladesh has no specific laws on biodiversity but has adopted various

legislative policies and inventions to conserve its remaining biodiversity. The country has ratified

most of the international treaties and conventions related to conservation of biodiversity.

Some of the major legislative policies and approaches taken by the government which provide

provisions for biodiversity conservation in the country are

• National Biodiversity Strategy and Action Plan (NBSAP);

• National Conservation Strategy (NCS);

• Bangladesh Wildlife (Preservation) Order, 1973;

• Bangladesh Forest Act, 1927 and subsequent amendments;

• National Environment Management Action Plan (NEMAP);

• The Bangladesh Environment Conservation Act, 1995 and Environment Conservation

Rules 1997;

• The Pesticides Ordinance, 1971;

• The Environment Courts Act-2000;

• Sustainable Environment Management Programme (SEMP); and the

• Nishorgo Support Project (NSP) for the co management of protected areas.

The declaration of PAs for biodiversity conservation is rather a new concept in Bangladesh, he

said. In 1974, the Bangladesh Wildlife Preservation Act defined three types of PA under

different IUCN protected area management categories in the country, viz., wild life sanctuary,

and national park and game reserve.

Though various threats have been posed on PAs of Bangladesh, government has taken

effective measures to face the challenges, he concluded.

PRESENTATION ON NATIONAL BIODIVERSITY ACTION PLAN:

In his presentation Dr. Daniels said that every country has its own mandates in implementing

the action plan. In fact, India delayed in implementing and

finally developed its first action plan in 2008. The action plan

has to be revised and updated every five years and it is

crucial to give a comprehensive background, he said. The first

National Action Plan for the country was prepared in 2008

and formally adopted in 2009.

He emphasised the achievements made by India for the past

few years and also suggested that these achievements can

be showcased during the CoP-11. Though certain deficit

exists, major gaps can be identified and workable targets can

be set, he said.

He stated “in the global context, strategic plan

has to be set for achieving Aichi Biodiversity

targets. 2011 – 2020 has been declared as the

decade of biodiversity with the theme “Living in

Harmony with Nature”. The main purpose of

this strategic plan is effective implementation

and shared vision & mission. It urges parties to

enable participation, develop national and

regional targets, reviewing and updating the

targets which can be presented in CoP-11,

using them as instruments for effective

integration, monitor and review the

implementation, synergies among the

biodiversity related conventions, promoting the

generation by using scientific information.” He

further stressed on employing regional

cooperation. India is in the process of preparing

the 12 fifth year plan.

He emphasized the efforts of initiating action to address the underlying causes of biodiversity

loss by mainstreaming the biodiversity concerns and taking actions to decrease the direct

pressures on biodiversity. The Strategic Plan includes 20 headline targets for 2015 or 2020 (the

"Aichi Biodiversity Targets"), organized under five strategic goals that is operated both at global

and national level. This can be better explained as aspirations for achievement at global level

and a flexible framework at the national or regional level, he added.

He said “in terms of national context, intergovernmental co-operation and achievable targets

that provide opportunities for cross-sectoral integration are focused. Nearly 10 major threats

are identified.” He finally concluded by saying that Aichi Target 1 is the most relevant in making

people aware of biodiversity values and conservation and Target 4 that states, “stakeholders at

all levels have taken steps to achieve or have implemented the plans”.

PRESENTATION GUIDELINES FOR BIODIVERSITY MANAGEMENT COMMITTEES (BMCS):

Dr. V. Arivudai Nambi from MSSRF made a

detailed presentation on the Guidelines for

Biodiversity Management Committees being

finalized by the committee constituted for the

same and highlighted the methods and process

involved in initiating BMCs in Tamil Nadu. He

also discussed about the the ground realities of

villages in biodiversity conservation. Nallur was

designated as the India’s first Local Heritage

Site.

He also projected the BMC formation method with indication of risks involved in BMC formation.

He listed out the total BMCs, PBRs, BHS in India. Technical Support Groups (TSG) organized

by SBBs for strengthening BMCs at Village, Block and District level and Financial Resources for

BMCs were the key notes focused.

He also suggested the draft guidelines for BMCs and to implement Biological Diversity Act and

Rules to the local knowledgeable persons. Invitees from departments of Forest, Agriculture,

Livestock, Health, Fisheries, and Education were also given special attention. He insisted that

BMCs should develop linkages with other committees like Joint Forest Management

(JFM),Forest Conservation Committees (FCCs) and Eco Development Committees (EDC) for

matters related to wild biological diversity and or biological diversity found in forest lands. The

management committees can be actively involved in the preparation of Biodiversity

Management Plan using the outputs of PBRs, he said. The State Biodiversity Boards, he added,

can facilitate the establishment of Biodiversity Heritage Sites in consultation with local bodies

and key stakeholders.

A field trip to felicitate the delegates was organized by National Biodiversity Authority to

historical sites including UNESCO heritage sites in Mamallapuram. All the delegates visited

Muthukadu and had a nice boating. Then they visited Crocodile bank and saw how Irulas were

extracting the snake venom from different venomous snakes. Later they visited the farm where

different species of crocodile are maintained under captive breeding. After that the team visited

Mamallapuram temple that was built 1400 years ago by Pallava’s.

PRESENTATION ON ACCESS AND BENEFIT SHARING MECHANISM:

Ms.Suneetha M.Subramanian, discussed on the combination of monetary and non-monetary

incentives that would be optimal and the kind of

knowledge systems and innovations and

institutional arrangements with regard to the

ABS mechanism in India. She spoke of

alternate models of benefit sharing that will be

appealing and practical to communities and

businesses.

Her presentation detailed on communication

tools required to raise awareness on good practices among different stakeholders, constitutional

guarantees given to different stakeholders - especially ILCs and implementation effectiveness of

domestic legal provisions.

She expressed concern over the perception of local communities and innovators themselves on

the issues of benefit-sharing, the role of NGOs and civil society and influence of international

law.

She discussed issues on TK ownership and the simultaneous occurrence of TK and biological

resources, use of biological resources and TK in modified and unmodified form. She said,

depending on user group, benefit sharing mechanisms should vary from being commercial and

non-commercial.

She stressed on the importance of identification of check points to enable monitoring such as

PIC, certificates of origin during filing of patents or registration of a product, etc.

Broad guidelines anticipating different scenarios will be useful with respect to access and

benefit sharing mechanism. She concluded adding that there are several good practice toolkits

like ABS Management toolkit and certification systems that seek to promote good practice.

PRESENTATION ON LOCAL PRACTICES IN THE CONTEXT OF ABS AND TK ISSUES:

Mr. G. Hariramamurthi spoke at length

on local practices in the context of ABS

and TK and explained that 60-80% of

the population seeks healthcare

through Traditional Medicine (TRM). He

said, international and national policies

recommend to support, recognize,

integrate, and utilise Traditional Health

Practices (THPs) in National Health

Systems.

He added that policy documents exist on traditional, complementary and alternative medicine

with regard to regulation, safety, efficacy, research, clinical trials and rational use related to

TRM, training, IPRs, etc. He put forth that 1 million community supported THPs are present

almost in all villages, several millions practiced at the household level, managing a range of

simple to complex conditions.

More than 6200 plant species used in LHTs, more than 200 species are threatened in the wild,

he said.

He gave few examples of ABS models practiced in the district of Dakshina Kannada in

Karnataka, detailing the products produced by a company called Parampara like Vitex negundo

oil for pain relieving, Larvin for wound healing in Cattle, Mastiheal for Mastitis in Cattle and

Abscess, Triphala Vet for Bloat and indigestion in cattle, Fertaheal forDebility and infertility and

general tonic for cattle, and High Milk Gain for Enhanced Production of Good Quality Milk from

Cattle. He said that Parampara products addressed the local needs of animal health and were

based on local biological resources & local health practices. He added that these products

reduced dependence on veterinary doctors for primary veterinary healthcare, enhanced access

to safe and efficacious veterinary medicines, reduced animal health expenditure, reduced

antibiotic and hormonal residues in milk and also shared profits.

The result of this ABS he said, was that 15 community owned enterprises were established, 112

in-situ Medicinal Plants Conservation Areas of 200 to 500 Hectares each were established, 10

Medicinal Plants Conservation Parks were set up, more than 550 People’s Biodiversity

Registers were released based on Local Health Practices, more than 2,00,000 Home Herbal

Gardens were established and 1 million beneficiaries were covered. He further added that

saving of household expenses on primary health care was enhanced.

PRESENTATION ON INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND BIODIVERSITY AS AN INTRODUCTORY

FRAMEWORK:

Mr.Shamnad Basheer spoke on

IP and biodiversity as an

introductory framework, detailing

the bio-piracy narrative on neem

and turmeric controversies. He

opined that TK is sometimes not

disclosed because people say

that it is God’s gift or it is their

income related and hence they

keep it confidential.

He discussed on patenting framework and patenting eligibility, with specific mention to inventive

steps and patent manipulation, disclosure of the origin and source of biological material

according to Section 10(4). With regard to depository requirement he said that it cannot be

sufficiently described and that it was not available to the public. He spoke on protection of plant

variety to new plants, TK – DL, a database prepared to prevent patents and said that problems

come when they want to commercialize the database.

He spoke on patents coupled with benefit sharing, on the model example used by the UN now.

Section 3(p) which says that one cannot patent an invention which, in effect, is traditional

knowledge or which is an aggregation or duplication of known properties of traditionally known

component or components, was discussed and he stressed on the importance to preserve

“informal” systems of knowledge. He added that increased commercialization will threaten this

knowledge system over time - a reductionist approach.

CONCLUSION:

Dr. Balakrishna Pisupati, Chairman, NBA, made the concluding remarks. He said that there are

various issues in Biological Diversity Act that needs to be addressed. “Always the challenge

which remains is that are we looking at the Act as a melting point. Looking at the reality, it is like

a salad bowl. Everyone has to come together to implement the Act. Couple of points needs to

be discussed and I suppose that the presentations during these three days would have given

the idea to tackle some of these issues. Attempts to capture some of these people, who helped

in dynamic way of approach to these issues were present here as resource persons”, he said.

He thanked all the members for participating in this training and regretted the misfortune of

those who were unable to be part of this. He requested all the delegates that this network

should continue resulting in more meetings and trainings that will help in better understanding of

the legislation and implementing of the same.

List of Invitees/Members

S.No Name & Designation/ Organization

1 Mr. M D Mozibur Rahman Senior Assistant Secretary Law and Justice Division Ministry of Law, Justice and Parliamentary Affairs Bangladesh Mob: +8801817649457 [email protected]

2 Dr.A.P.Singh Member Secretary, Gujarat Biodiversity Board [email protected]

3 Dr.A.K.Malhotra Chairman, Jharkhand Biodiversity Board Mob: 9955717199 [email protected], [email protected]

4 Mr. Devaraja, H.S. Dep. Director of Agriculture Karnataka

5 Dr. K.P.Laladhas Member Secretary, Kerala Biodiversity Board Mob: 9447271034 [email protected]

6 Shri.Shahbaz Ahmad Member Secretary, Madhya Pradesh Biodiversity Board Mob: 9424790022 [email protected],mp

7 Shri.R.K.Srivastava Member Secretary, Manipur Biodiversity Board Mob: 8974008966 [email protected], [email protected]

mailto:[email protected]





mailto:[email protected],mp



8 Shri.Debal Ray Member Secretary, West Bengal Biodiversity Board Mob: 9433046567 [email protected], [email protected]

9 Dr.Anirban Roy Research officer West Bengal

10 Sri Ram Gangader Bio Resources Export Ent. Andhra Pradesh [email protected]

11 Dr.M.K.Ramesh Professor of Law National Law School of India Bangalore Ph: 80 2321 3160 [email protected]

12 Mr.Kabir Sanjay Bavikatte Consultant, UNEP-ABS Project Bangalore Mob: 09008965803 [email protected]

13 Mr.Pushpa Kumar Lakshmanan Assistant Professor Faculty of Law, University of Delhi Delhi Mob: 9871820771 [email protected]

14 Dr.Suneetha Subramanian Senior Research Fellow UNU-IAS Mob: 9840574184 [email protected]








15 Mr.G.Hariramamurthy Assistant Director and Head, Centre for Local Health Traditions, IAIM-FRLHT Mob : 9448372020 [email protected], [email protected]

16 Prof.Shamnad Basheer Professor in IP Law, National University of Juridical Sciences, NUJS Kolkata Mob :9831512975 [email protected]

17 Dr.Balakrishna Pisupati Chairman National Biodiversity Authority

18 Mr.C.Achalender Reddy Secretary National Biodiversity Authority

19 Dr.Ravishankar Thupalli Project Manager India UNDP Biodiversity Project National Biodiversity Authority

20 Dr.Ishwar C.Poojar Project Manager UNEP-GEF-MoEF-ABS Project National Biodiversity Authority

21 Dr.C.Thomson Jacob Consultant UNEP-GEF-MoEF-ABS Project National Biodiversity Authority

22 Dr.Prakash Nelliyat Project Associate UNEP-GEF-MoEF-ABS Project National Biodiversity Authority

23 Ms.R.Vidya Administrative Secretary UNEP-GEF-MoEF-ABS Project National Biodiversity Authority





24 Shri.K.Chitrarasu Advisor Law National Biodiversity Authority

25 Shri.P.Anandha Kumar Technical Assistant (Bot.) National Biodiversity Authority

26 Ms.Uma Finance Assistant India UNDP Biodiversity Project National Biodiversity Authority

27 Ms.Gayathri Project Assistant India UNDP Biodiversity Project National Biodiversity Authority

28 Shri.N.Singaram Computer Specialist, UNEP-GEF-MoEF-ABS Project National Biodiversity Authority

29 Mr.Brian Legal Executive National Biodiversity Authority

30 Mr.Tamilarasan Legal Executive National Biodiversity Authority

31 Mr.Balasubramani. N Computer Assistant National Biodiversity Authority

32 Ms.S.Shalini Technical Executive National Biodiversity Authority

Afghanistan

Bangladesh

Bhutan

India

Maldives

Nepal

Pakistan

SriLanka

Agenda Training on National Legislation on Biodiversity for Government Officials of

SAARC Member States

29 – 31 August 2012 Venue: Chennai

Wednesday, 29thAugust 2012

09:30– 10:00 hrs Assembly& Registration

10:00 – 10:45 hrs Opening Session, Welcome Address – (Ministry Officials) - tbc

10:45 – 11:15 hrs Group Photo & Coffee

11:15 – 11:45 hrs Presentation on India’s Biological Diversity Act and Rules ( NBA)

11:45 – 12:00 hrs Discussion

12:00 – 12:30 hrs Legal Systems and Issues Related to Biodiversity – Prof. Ramesh M. K. NLSIU, B’ Lore


12:45 – 14:00 hrs Lunch

14:00 – 14:30 hrs Biodiversity Protocols; Access and Benefit Sharing – Mr Kabir Sanjay Bhavikatte, NBA


14:45 – 15:15 hrs Issues on Nagoya Protocol – Prof. Pushpakumar L., Delhi University


15:30 – 15:45 hrs Tea Break

15:45 – 16:15 hrs Presentation from Bhutan on Biodiversity Policies and Laws; Preparation for CoP-11


16:30 – 17:00 hrs Presentation from Sri Lanka on Biodiversity Policies and Laws; Preparation for CoP-11


17:15 – 17:45 hrs Presentation from Bangladesh on Biodiversity Policies and Laws; Preparation for CoP-11


18:00hrs Closure

19:30 – 20:30 hrs Cultural Programme and Dinner (BharataNatyam)

Thursday, 30thAugust 2012 09:30 – 10:00 hrs Presentation from India on Biodiversity Policies and Laws; Preparation for CoP-11

10:00– 10.15 hrs 10.15 – 10.30 hrs

Discussion Tea break

10.30 – 11: 30 hrs 11: 30 – 13:00 hrs

Group Work Group I – Implementing challenges from Policy and Legal Perspective Group II – Preparing for CoP11 Meeting

Group Work Group I – Achieving optimal efficiency in implementing actions for BD issues, including ABS Legal requirement for region Group II – Legal review for convention synergies at National level

13:00 – 14: 00 hrs 14:00 – 18:30 hrs

Presentations of the group discussions Lunch Field Visit to Mahabalipuram / Crocodile bank

18:30 – 20: 30 hrs Dinner

Friday, 31stAugust 2012 09:30 – 10:00 hrs 10:00 – 10:15 hrs 10:15 – 11:00 hrs 11:00 – 11:15 hrs 11.15 – 11.45 hrs 11:45 – 12:00 hrs 12:00 – 12.30 hrs 12.30 – 13:15 hrs 13:15 – 13:20 hrs

Benefit Sharing Mechanisms – Dr Sunitha Subramanian Discussion Consolidation of issues presented on the day two. Coffee Local Practices – In the Context of ABS and TK Issues - Shri. Hariramamurthy G., Discussion IPR and Biodiversity – Legal Issues – Prof. Shamnad Basheer Discussion on the session;Preparing a Road map for National Implementation of Biodiversity Policies and Law; Moving forward Regional - Agenda on Biodiversity Closing Remarks (Secretary, NBA - tbc) Lunch Departure of Participants

A Report on the Training on National Legislation on ...nbaindia.org/uploaded/pdf/SAARC_Report.pdf · Afghanistan Bangladesh Bhutan India Maldives Nepal Pakistan SriLanka A Report

Documents