Rice, Rice, Baby!
In case it wasn’t obvious, we are gathered here today to talk about Rice. But not just any rice — the most regal of them all — Basmati Rice. No, I am not going to discuss the history behind how the rice became popular or how its aromatic and long grain nature invariably translates to its price. This article would actually be dealing with the GI protection granted to Basmati Rice.
Unfortunately, GI does not have ties to GI Joe. GI, short for Geographical Indications/Indicators are intellectual property protections granted to goods/product/service indicating origin in a country/region. Now, one might think that trademark does the same — allow consumers to identify products to respective brands/companies/entities. But the difference in the two lies in the ‘geographic’ part of it. GIs are in essence a notice given to the world over that a specific good/product/service belongs to a particular geographic area and possesses quality/reputation owing to that origin. Popular examples are — Champagne from France, Nagpur Orange, Tequila from Mexico, Columbian Coffee, Swiss Watches, Pochampalli from Andhra Pradesh, etc. More information on GI can be found here. One might wonder what the advantages of obtaining such a protection are. Well, apart from promoting ‘local production’ by artisans, farmers, small businessmen/traders, GI protection also ensures adherence to a minimum standard of quality, not to mention how the export of indigenous/localized products helps the GDP of a country.
Basmati Rice is one such GI and has been a cause of several disputes in the past, not only internationally but also in India. One such case was concerning Basmati rice that was grown in Texas and the company (RiceTec) growing the same filed for a patent for the same under TEXMATI (Details are here and here) and India had objected to such use. Another instance was how back home, after a GI tag was granted to the region in Indo — Gangetic Plains (IGP) below the foothills of the Himalayas, spread across several states — Himachal Pradesh, J&K, Punjab, Haryana, Uttarakhand, Western UP and Delhi, the same was challenged by farmers in Madhya Pradesh, with the Apex Court ruling against such inclusion (details can be found here).
GI, like all intellectual property, is territorial in nature, implying that if one has to export or sell products elsewhere, it is preferred that they are protected in that region — either through filing an international application under the Lisbon system or individual applications in specific countries. The tale we shall discuss, however, is that of the clash of two neighboring countries over GI rights over Basmati. The thing is, since Basmati grows in the Indo — Gangetic plains and owing to favorable climate conditions of the Indian subcontinent, both India and Pakistan grow and export the rice, with India’s estimated basmati export amounting to about 4.8 billion and Pakistan’s sale amounting to 2.2 billion.
For recognition of Basmati Rice in the European Union, both India and Pakistan were considering filing a joint application in 2008, but the same did not actualize due to the tensions between the two nations on account of events of 26/11. Coincidentally, The Agricultural and Processed Food Products Export Development Authority (APEDA) did file and subsequently receive the registration for recognition of Basmati as a GI in India and the application was filed on 26/11. Having a domestic registration for nearly 10 years and making no headway with respect to recognition in the EU, in July 2018, India filed for registration and recognition of Basmati as GI (much to the disadvantage of Pakistan). The application in itself is an interesting read with references such as how ‘Basmati’ comes from two Sanskrit words — Vas (aroma) and Mati (ingrained from the origin) and the epic Punjabi poem Heer Ranjha, to elaborate on the origin. This application was published in Official Journal of European Union in September 2020 with a right of opposing such application within 3 months. Given how earlier in the Texmati case, both India and Pakistan had united together to protect Basmati rice rights, it was a little odd that all of sudden India says ‘My Precious’ Basmati and asks Pakistan to take a hike.
Obviously what ensued was a kerfuffle between India and Pakistan. The application would have economic repercussions since 35% of the global Basmati Rice trade is contributed by Pakistan; not to mention how in the event that the application proceeds for registration, it would invariably result in consumers holding the rice grown in India to be of superior quality, thus affecting the perceived value of the product. As soon as the publication was out in the open and Pakistan caught wind of the same, Pakistan decided to oppose such registration. But the challenges were plenty including how Pakistan did not have a GI act, much less recognition of Basmati as a GI in its own jurisdiction which is necessary as per EU Regulations and to prove the validity of rights. What threw me off was that when there was speculation of an opposition being filed, the Indian officials stated that they never claimed that rice is “exclusively of Indian origin”. Anywhoo, Pakistan did obtain a GI eventually for Basmati Rice and file for a notice of Opposition against India’s application. There was also an opposition filed by Nepal against India’s application, which was slightly ironic since all of the imported Basmati Rice in Nepal is imported from India.
I think that this was all to put pressure on India and exploit the meaning of the “Indo-Gangetic plains” so as to include the protection for Basmati rice in India & Pakistan (and maybe Nepal, but I highly doubt that). The more, the merrier, right? Wrong! If blanket protection is granted to all 3 nations, what even happens to the whole GI being specific to a specific geographic region thing? Yes, some might say that the essence of GI is not lost as “Indo-Gangetic plains” is a region but the region is vast, spread across multiple countries and the whole aim of helping localized production of goods/services is then lost. Fortunately, the word on the street is that India and Pakistan are now in talks to amicably resolve the matter and putting the whole thing to bed. But one would only conclusively know this after the consultation process (discussions resultant of filing of opposition and ones that are confidential in nature) comes to an end, which is estimated in September 2021. Hopefully, Nepal would also be a party to this discussion. Wake me up when September ends, I guess.