It would not be an exaggeration to state that our culture, heritage and traditions form a predominant aspect of the Indian ecosystem. A vital element of this heritage forms the handloom, weaves and yarns sector, holding an impeccable reputation and an astounding economic asset value across the globe. Consequently, protection of the same is of paramount concern and it is essential that those sections of the community that are specifically engaged in its fostering and development shall be afforded adequate acknowledgement and entitlement. Thus, paving the path for the application of Geographical Indications (GIs) in this sector, first recognised by the WTO through the TRIPS Agreement and succeeded upon by India through the Geographical Indications of Goods Act, 1999 (hereon the Act). However, although the promotion of GIs for Indian weaves and handlooms has been well intentioned, the implementation of the same has been somewhat of a grey area, owing to several external adversities such as genericide, among others, thereby, necessitating strict legislative vigilance and threat control across different regions of India.
The current Indian legal scenario
The scope of GIs pertains to attributing intellectual property rights in goods exclusively originating in a specific region or territory. In essence, GIs facilitate consumers with a means to ascertain the value and reputation possessed by products originating from a particular region. Specifically in the Indian Handloom sector, imminent recognition has been afforded to works such as Banarasi Saree, Muga Silk, Pashminas, etc.
Considering the importance of the protection afforded by GIs in a country like India, that is largely dependent on its cultural reputation and value arising out of the traditional knowledge and ailing from a lack of infrastructural and legal development in the legal sectors, a GI Tag plays an imperative role in trade and commerce for the indigenous producers. In the case of the Chanderi fabric belonging to the Chanderi town in heart of the country, Madhya Pradesh, the main obstacle faced by the indigenous producers of Chanderi was severe competition from producers selling Chanderi imitations in Surat and Varanasi leading to mass exploitation of the indigenous weavers. This was eventually dealt with by the Government and the United Nations Industrial Development Organization (UNIDO) in 2003 through the launch of the Chanderi Development Foundation (CDF) and the GI Tag subsequently leading to the inauguration of the Chanderi Weavers’ ICT resource centre, evidently improving the overall economic status of the Chanderi weavers.
Internationally, GIs are recognised under Articles 22 and 23 of the TRIPS Agreement. However, since Article 23 only applies to wines and spirits, the same has proven as a hurdle for registration of textiles for GI Tags. For instance, in the case of Muga Silk belonging to the Northern Eastern state of Assam, the textile has been, time and again, largely confused with the textile Moonga Silk that is commonly produced throughout the east coast including Bihar, Jharkhand, Uttar Pradesh and Chhattisgarh despite the Silk Board of India declaring the non-existence of the ‘Moonga’ as a variant of silk. Thus, for the purpose of registration of Muga Silk for a GI Tag, and without protection under Article 23, the onus, under the provision of Article 22 of the TRIPS agreement fell upon the Plaintiff to prove dilution of image, thus, leading to dilution of rights of exclusivity. However, this loophole was subsequently dealt with by India through the extension of protection beyond wines and spirits vide Section 22(2) of the Act.
This Act was enacted in India in 1999 which was subsequently followed by the Geographical Indications of Goods (Registration and Protection) Rules of 2002, altogether establishing a sound mechanism of protection for GIs allowing for different associations and organisations for registration of GIs for up to 10 years at a time. The implementation of GIs in India has been vital to the preservation of its textile ecosystem and has facilitated the end of several feuds. For instance, the awarding of the GI Tag to the Patan Patola weave indigenous in the west to the state of Gujarat, essentially put an end to the feud between the Rajkot District Weavers Association and the Patan Double-Ikat Patola Weavers' Association, in the latter’s favour.
However, as instrumental as the construction of the Act might be, its efficacy may be put to question in respect of the Handloom sector. The recent times have seen a rise in imitations and emulations with respect to famous weaves and handlooms owing to large scale genericide as well as a lack of post-production control across different regions of the country. One such instance is that of the Banarasi Saree, which had been applied for GI Tags by several organizations across communities back in 2007, later secured in 2009. Owing to the handloom’s popularity and the multitude of certification marks including the Silk mark as well as the Handloom mark, several inspection bodies including Master Weavers’ Self-Regulation and the Textiles Committee, Weavers’ service centre, Department of Handlooms and the Development Commissioner of Handlooms. This resulted in the disparagement of the collective reputation of the Banarasi Saree and lead to widespread imitation of the same across states like Surat and Varanasi as well as China at much cheaper rates. Thus, leading to a trade crisis for the authentic weavers. In essence, it is evident that the Banarasi Saree has failed to benefit from the GI Tag owning to the lack of proper implementation of the legislation.
In another case down south, that is of the Venkatagiri Saree woven in Venkatagiri, Andhra Pradesh, and the 18th Saree to receive a GI Tag in the name of Venkatagiri Handloom Sarees Apex Society, the quest for recognition faced stiff competition from power loom imitation produce in Tamil Nadu. This came as a consequence of the lack of policy awareness among the weavers as well as a sheer lack of government support post production.
Takeaways for future prospects
With growing numbers, especially on an international scale, it is essential that the GI legislation is efficacious in the implementation of its intent to protect the sanctity of the Indian textile and handloom industry and has evidently made substantial progress in that direction. However, a lacking multilateral system on an international level may jeopardise those efforts. In any case, while the rules pertaining to GIs are still in the process of evolving and the concept is still in its initial stages, it would be beneficial if the purview of GIs were to expand to incorporate a lot more than just wines and spirits and the same may hopefully evolve to an extent so as to encompass other indigenous, yet globally renowned phenomena.
