WIPO member states say they are considering how to respond to a report which concluded that the Organization's director general Kamil Idris repeatedly misrepresented his age. "This is not a witch hunt but it has to be resolved," said a member of one national delegation. "It's like the elephant in the room."
The report, carried out by WIPO's Internal Audit and Oversight Division and subsequently leaked to journalists in Geneva, says that Idris sought to change his records at WIPO to show that he was born on August 24 1954, despite signing numerous earlier documents showing his date of birth as August 24 1945.
The investigation was carried out at the request of the United Nations Joint Inspection Unit.
The report says that when Idris applied for a job at WIPO in 1982, his application form said that he was born in 1945. Had he made it clear he was born in 1954 – as WIPO now says he was – then it appears that he would not have been eligible for the job because he would not have had the 10 years' professional experience required for the post.
Last year Idris asked WIPO to amend its records, saying that the 1954 figure was a typographical error. This led to speculation that he was seeking to boost his pension, an accusation that a spokeswoman for WIPO denies.
She said: "The allegations in the newspapers and in the said report that the director general would have sought to 'profit' from this error are groundless."
"As a matter of fact, it has been established that the rectification will result in a considerable financial reduction in the pension of the director general. Therefore, all false allegations regarding possible benefits are based on wrong speculations and will not occur, as they do not correspond with the reality or his intentions."
But WIPO member states have already begun to consider how to respond to the report's findings.
A member of one delegation described the situation as a "disaster", saying that it was slowly eroding staff morale at WIPO. "It is in danger of becoming a dysfunctional organization ... proper governance and transparency matters a lot."
And he said that while IP owners may not be directly affected by the row over the director general's age, it could damage the development agenda debate underway at WIPO and may influence the way in which policy priorities are set and money is spent at the organization.
"We are aware of the internal report and concerned about what we hear about the conclusions," said a spokeswoman at the US mission to the UN in Geneva. "We have not decided on any action at this point but we are consulting with other member states as to what makes most sense as the next step moving forward."
The US has previously called for increased transparency at the IP organization.
About 89% of WIPO's total income in 2005 came from fees derived from IP services and fees from arbitration and mediation, while some 6% came from member states, according to the Organization's latest annual report.
Since WIPO relies on fees for a large part of its income – instead of funding from member state governments – it is harder for richer countries to assert control over it.
But not all member states have yet to see the report into Idris's age. "We have no knowledge of the probe and we have not seen a copy," a member of one of the African delegations told MIP Week. "We were surprised to see the reports in the press. We don't know who conducted it – whether it was an individual or a committee and when it was conducted."
"We have been focusing on this week's development agenda talks," he added.
If Idris does not offer to resign over the report's conclusions, WIPO's member states could be faced with a dilemma. According to a member of one delegation, there is no certainty that those countries who want to see him go would win the backing of delegations that want him to stay on in the job.
"It will take some very delicate diplomacy," he said. "We need to decide what is an appropriate response so it doesn't blow the organization apart."
Although WIPO would not comment on what might happen next, one possibility is that the Internal Audit and Oversight Division's report is discussed by the next meeting of WIPO's Audit Committee, scheduled to be held in Geneva at the end of March.
The Audit Committee was set up last year to strengthen internal oversight following a 2005 report that criticized WIPO for weaknesses in the organization's management. It has nine members – seven are nominated by member states and elected by the Program and Budget Committee.
Another two members are elected by the first seven based on their qualifications as senior oversight professionals or senior managers. One is to come from within the United Nations system and one from outside it.
Another committee could also play a role in the event of the director general's post becoming vacant. WIPO's Coordination Committee was established by Article 8 of the WIPO Convention and has 82 members, including the US, the UK, Brazil, Mexico, Korea and Cameroon. Its role is to advise the General Assembly, the WIPO Conference, and the director general on administrative and financial issues.
The Coordination Committee also has the power to nominate candidates for the post of WIPO director general and to appoint an acting director general if the post becomes vacant between two sessions of the General Assembly. It meets once a year, unless the director general, the Committee chair, or one quarter of its members request that it meets in an extraordinary session.
