Basmati is a top-quality rice from the northern provinces of India and Pakistan. The word means fragrant earth, and the rice is a slender aromatic long grain variety that originated in this region and is a major export crop for both countries. It has been cultivated by farmers for centuries on the foothills of the Himalayas - in Punjab, Haryana, and Uttar Pradesh.

Several varieties are now grown in the U.S., such as Texmati and Kasmati, and all are growing in popularity. (One U.S. company has made an effort to patent Basmati rice and trademark the name). Their flavour is very good, but not quite up to real imported Basmati.

Some use brown Texmati or brown Basmati when available. Brown rice has only the outer husk removed, leaving the germ and bran layer, and retaining most of the nutritional value, especially the B vitamins. This minimal processing also produces a rice more flavorful than polished white rice.

When cooking, they use approximately 1 7/8 parts water to 1 part rice, with just a pinch of salt and a little olive oil. Respected cookbooks differ on these proportions, some recommending 1 1/2- 1 and others up to 2 - 1 ratios. Experiment, using the same brand and type of rice each time, and find the proportions which work best for you.

Biopiracy

Biopiracy is when companies claim patented rights to innovations made by local farmers over centuries. According to GRAIN and Gaia, "when these discoveries are patented, complete or effective ownership is vested in the bioprospecting company, not the source country. Communities derive a great deal of financial and, more often, non- financial use value from biodiversity. But for companies, it is the patent that is of value, not the plant. The value of Southern biodiversity lies, for them, in the creation of intellectual property (ie gene and compound patents). Once the intellectual property is established, economic logic dictates that commercial supplies of a product will be drawn from the cheapest and easiest route possible."

Status on November 2000:

The Indian Government was fighting an important legal battle against biopiracy, bound to set precedence in defining the legal rights to plants breaded for centuries by local farmers all around the world. India is, so far successfully, contesting RiceTec's patent claims on Indian basmati rice genes. Parallel African cases are to be expected.

In 1997 the Texas based RiceTec Inc. obtained Patent No. 5663484 from the US Patent and Trade Mark Office (PTO) on Basmati rice lines and grains. The Research Foundation for Science Technology and Ecology (RFSTE) at Delhi, India along with others filed a case in public interest in the Supreme Court of India on March 4, 1998. On this basis, in June 2000, the Indian Government filed a "request for Re- examination" at the US PTO, claiming that the patent is in violation of sovereign rights of India, which include the indigenous and inherent knowledge systems of its farmers.

Because of the pressure built up by people's movements on the issue, the American Company RiceTec withdrew claims 4, 15, 16 & 17 from its patent. Also the US PTO has opened up all the claims in the patent i.e. claims 1 to 20 for re- examination. The Government of India has until November 8, 2000 to file a reply in its case at the US PTO. "The next step is to have all the claims revoked.

• Since the patent was filed in the US, it would have conferred RiceTec sole monopoly over the marketing of rice grain possessing the said novel traits there. Theoretically, RiceTec would have been able to block our exports of basmati rice to the US any time, since commercial sale of grains with similar attributes would have tantamounted to an infringement of the patent granted to the company, a Commerce Ministry official commented on the ongoing case to the Indian newspaper The Hindu Business Line. This would, in turn, have hit Indian basmati exports to the US, annually amounting to 40,000-50,000 tonnes, worth around $30 million, according to the same newspaper.

• According to TWN, Thailand is worried that its famed jasmine is the next to be patented. Thai legislators are working to protect the nation's fragrant rice under a trademark before RiceTec or another foreign company acquires such certification.

• According to a report by the organisations Gaia and GRAIN, "Biodiversity for sale: Dismantling the hype about benefit sharing", corporations using traditional knowledge rarely acknowledge its use. When they make small changes to the product, they claim it as a new invention. "Most known biopiracy cases take the latter form. The patent system offers many opportunities to discount the contribution of indigenous knowledge and innovation," the report says.

• When companies find a product they want to market, they almost always seek to protect it with a patent, in order to gain a monopoly on commercialising it, the report goes on. "In order to patent a product, it must be considered to be novel (i.e. a discovery) and to involve an inventive step. Many commercial products based on indigenous knowledge do not fulfill these requirements because they are not new to the communities that supplied the knowledge about them and companies often simply extract the chemical of interest, but companies and patent offices often conveniently ignore this."

The case of Namibian harpago

Renee Vellve from GRAIN confirms that there are lots of parallels to the basmati biopiracy case in Africa. The Gaia Foundation in London has its own work groups working on Africa. One of the best known African examples in the biotrade GRAIN has been involved in is the harpago plant of southwestern Africa.

Harpago, a medicinal plant from Namibia, South Africa and Botswana, is growing in popularity in Northern markets. It is also known as Devils Claw or Grapple. US consumers pay more than US$ 700 per kilo of harpago extract. Most harpago on the international market comes from Namibia, where collectors are paid between US$ 0.16 and US$ 0.66 per kilo of dried plant material. Harpago leaves Namibia at between US$ 2.30 and US$ 3.28 per kilo, Cyril Lombard, from CRIAA SA-DC, informed GRAIN.

Based on these figures, more than 99% of the value of harpago trade is captured by European and US companies. Of the approximately 1% that accrues to Namibia, only about 0.06% typically goes to the farming families that collect the plant. The African families struggling to make a living in the harpago business hope that over time they will get a fairer deal. according to GRAIN.

Says Lombard, "What the present suppliers of this raw material want is so basic, yet so difficult to achieve. They want decent prices, they want to be kept in the supply chain in the longer term even if the resource [can be] eventually sourced from cultivated supplies, and they want to gradually do more and more value-adding in-country." Meanwhile, herbal medicine companies are busily patenting methods to make extracts and pharmaceuticals from harpago, thereby making sure that these aspirations will not be realised.

Recent "Intellectual Property Right" claims on harpago include Choongwae Pharmaceutical of South Korea (US 5929038), Finzeberg Nachfolger GMBH (WO9744051), and Willmar Schwabe, Germany - part owner of Natures Way company (WO9734565).

Indian Farmers demand

The patent granted to RiceTec for Basmati rice lines and grains is a blatant case of biopiracy - the pirating of genetic material, biological resources and indigenous innovation of Third World countries.

The evidence provided by India in the re-examination of the Patent No. 5663484 shows that not only the grain, but the seeds and plants which produce the grain have been bred and cultivated over centuries in India and Pakistan. Women peasants in these countries have been the seed breeders and the selectors. They have freely shared the seeds resulting from their innovation with gene banks and breeders across the world including the Americas. It was through this free sharing that RiceTec got access to Basmati rice. RiceTec now claims to have invented the Basmati "rice plant", the "seed from said plant", "rice grains from rice seeds", the "method of selecting a rice plant for breeding or propagation" and the "cooking" of a sample of said grains! These are either creative regenerative functions of nature or innovations of Asian women farmers who have engaged in this for centuries.

RiceTec has withdrawn claims 4, 15, 16 & 17 related to the Basmati grain. In the light of evidence provided by India, which was not available to you when the patent was granted, we urge you as patent examiners to cancel all claims 1 - 20 in the present case. What is at stake are rights of millions of farmers in Asia and the Americas, the biological and intellectual heritage of the people of the Indian sub- continent and the integrity of the US PTO.

If the US PTO does not strike down the patent in its entirety, it will lose its credibility as an institution for identifying and rewarding genuine inventiveness and novelty and will acquire a reputation as protector of biopirates like RiceTec.

Anticipating your careful reconsideration of the Basmati Patent.

Yours sincerely,

[signature]

Status in June 2000

India Fights U.S. Basmati Rice Patent

Anthony Browne
Environment Correspondent

The battle over who controls the world's food supplies has escalated dramatically with the Indian government launching a legal challenge in the United States against an American company which has been granted a patent on the world- renowned basmati rice.

It is thought to be the first time a government in a developing country has challenged an attempt by a US company to patent -- and thus control the production of -- staple food and crops in what campaigners dub the 'rush for green gold'.

Basmati rice, sought-after for its fragrant taste, was developed by Indian farmers over hundreds of years, but the Texan company RiceTec obtained a patent for a cross-breed with American long-grain rice.

RiceTec was granted the patent on the basis of aroma, elongation of the grain on cooking and chalkiness. However, the Indian government last week filed 50,000 pages of scientific evidence to the US Patents and Trademarks Office, insisting that most high quality basmati varieties already possess these characteristics. The US Patent and Trademarks office accepted the petition and will re-examine its legitimacy.

The patent -- granted only in the US -- gives RiceTec control over basmati rice production in North America. Farmers have to pay a fee to grow the rice and are not allowed to plant the seeds to grow the following year's crops.

India fears the patent will severely damage exports from its own farmers to the US. In 1998, they exported almost 600,000 tonnes of basmati rice.

India has also objected to RiceTec calling the rice 'basmati', insisting the name should be used only for rice grown in the Basmati region of India. The Indian government is claiming similar status for basmati rice as that granted to Champagne, Cognac and Scotch whisky.

India's legal challenge is being support by ActionAid, which is launching a campaign to highlight the issue next week.

Ruchi Tripathi said: 'The basmati patent exposes the mounting threat posed by multinationals to crops devel oped and grown by poor farmers for generations.'

There are currently more than 200 patents granted on rice, almost exclusively to US and Japanese companies.

It is currently not possible to patent staple foods and crops in Europe or developing countries but a European directive is about to change that in the EU. At World Trade Organisation talks which start tomorrow, rich nations are expected to put pressure on developing nations to allow the patenting of crops in their own countries. Tripathi said: 'If rich countries abuse their power to get their way in the World Trade Organisation, developing countries like India will lose the right to challenge patents on crops.'

** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed for research and educational purposes only. **

Status in July 2001 - Technology to classify basmati rice

SCIENTISTS at the Centre for DNA Fingerprinting and Diagnostics in Hyderabad have developed a DNA marker technology that would help detecting the quality of basmati rice.

The government is hoping to arm itself with this new technology to face the stiff international competition in the multi-million dollar basmati rice market.

Though originally set up for specialising in human DNA fingerprinting to solve paternity disputes and criminal cases, CDFD, at the request of ministry of commerce, had been trying to extend this technology for classification of basmati rice varieties.

CDFD, which has now streamlined the DNA marker technology for rice, has offered to set up and host a rice `genotyping unit to authenticate and certify rice meant for export as well as for domestic consumption.

It has sought Rs 80 lakh from the commerce ministry for setting up an automated DNA marker certification facility centre in its campus that can analyse 60 rice samples a day.

The ministry which has been discussing the standard issue with the industry for five years is hopeful of the potential application of this technology in the basmati rice industry.

According to S R Gopalan, Joint secretary in commerce ministry, the proposal for DNA certification of basmati rice export ``is under consideration. He, however, said that similar certification of rice for domestic supplies is ``not on the cards at the moment.

The government had been particularly concerned about the so- called `super basmati and basmati No-385 exported by Pakistan claiming these to be superior to Indian varieties.

However, with the help of the new technology, the country is now confident of convincing the buyers about the quality of Indian basmati rice.

``The evolved varieties obtained by crossing pure basmati with semi-dwarf rice varieties have the aroma and grain size of basmati but still fall short of typical basmati in cooking qualities,says Javare Gowda Nagaraju, head of the molecular genetics lab at CDFD.

Some `so-called basmati rice in market is simply a mixture of genuine or evolved basmati and long grained non-basmati `Indica rice, he said.

Using as many as 15 DNA markers developed in-house and 28 available in public domain, Mr Nagarajus team has studied the genetic profiles of both Indian and Pakistani basmati.

``We have now conclusively shown that Pakistas `super basmati is an evolved variety and not a true basmati and its other variety (No-385) is far removed genetically from Indias ultra basmati (No-370), Mr Nagaraju claimed.

CDFD director Seyed Hasnain said the unambiguous results obtained scientifically will hopefully restore the rightful position of Indian basmati in the international market.

Nagaraju said using a combination of sensitive DNA assays available at CDFD, one could determine if a basmati rice variety is pure, evolved or a mixture of both and `tagged accordingly for the purpose of pricing and consumer selection.

Even one per cent adulteration of pure basmati could be detected by this, he added.

E A Siddiq, well-known geneticist who developed the pusa basmati says the DNA marker technology could be employed at the time new basmati hybrids are released in the market. It would help in establishing ``how close they are genetically to real basmati.

``This technology can also be used to detect genetically modified food for which India does not have facilities right now, he added. Foreign seed companies like Syngenta are examining the possibilities of utilising the CDFD technology for use in quality control of seeds it exports.

``We will decide once CDFD makes its technique public, the company spokesman said.

The Latest:

US firm gets patents for two varieties of Basmati. Indian government insists that it will not affect Indian farmers. Watch and see for further developments.