With reference to the 'National Intellectual Property Rights Policy', consider the following statements : 1. It reiterates India's commitment to the Doha Development Agenda and the TRIPS Agreement. 2. Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion is the nodal agency for regulating intellectual property rights in India. Which of the above statements is/are correct ?

The policy text (May 2016) is described as a vision document that explicitly aligns India’s IPR strategy with international frameworks like TRIPS and Doha.

High-yield for UPSC: questions often ask about policy objectives and international commitments. Understanding the 2016 policy helps link domestic innovation goals to trade/IP obligations and to syllabus topics on economic policy and international agreements.

The references name the Doha Development Agenda as a commitment reiterated by the National IPR Policy, and one reference explains Doha’s development-centred trade agenda.

Important for framing India’s stance in WTO negotiations and debates on special/differential treatment for developing countries; useful for questions on trade policy, development imperatives, and IP flexibilities.

The policy is described as compliant with TRIPS and explicitly reiterates commitment to TRIPS, making TRIPS central to interpreting India’s IPR policy.

Crucial for IAS mains and interview: connects domestic IP law reforms, public interest concerns (e.g., generics/compulsory licensing), and international legal obligations. Enables answers on balancing IP protection and development interests.

Multiple references state or suggest that IPRs are administered under DIPP (or its successor DPIIT), directly addressing which department is responsible for IPR regulation.

High-yield for governance questions: knowing the nodal department helps answer questions on institutional responsibility, administrative reforms, and policy implementation. Connects to Ministry of Commerce & Industry, statutory offices (like CGPDTM), and reform-era renaming/realignments. Useful for questions on institutional structure, policy ownership, and linkage with TRIPS/IPR enforcement.

Reference indicates DPIIT released the National IPR Policy (2016) and that it aims to create synergies between IP forms, statutes, and agencies.

Important for questions on policy objectives and timelines: understanding the policy's purpose (awareness, enforcement, commercialization) helps answer questions about India's IPR strategy and commitments (e.g., TRIPS/Doha). Links to broader topics like innovation policy, IP commercialization, and institutional reform.

Reference shows the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks operates under DPIIT, illustrating how IPR administration is structured beneath the department.

Useful for administrative-detail questions: knowing which statutory/operational offices report to the nodal department helps answer governance and implementation questions, and connects to patent/design/trademark law enforcement and processing timelines.