E-drug: Brundtland on WHO's role in trade agreements (cont'd)
---------------------------------------------
The speech of Ms Bruntland in Amsterdam is welcomed as she
advocated for the first time for compulsory licensing. But she seems
very uncomfortable doing it as she tries to justify it in a narrower way
than TRIPS itself. Quote: "For governments, industry, and other
stakeholders, there is a range of measures which might be used to
achieve preferential pricing. But where there is an abuse of patent
rights, where patented essential drugs are not on the market, or where
a national emergency exists, recourse to compulsory licensing is a
legitimate measure consistent with the TRIPS Agreement." May we
remind Ms Bruntland that article 31 does not limit the ground on
which a compulsory license may be granted? The last WHA gave a
clear mandate to WHO to assist countries in developing or adjusting
patent legislation in order to increase access to drugs and protect
public health. This definitely does not mean for WHO giving a narrow
lecture of article 31.
Pierre Chirac
MSF France
e-mail: pierchir@club-internet.fr
--
Send mail for the `E-Drug' conference to `e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'.
Mail administrative requests to `majordomo@usa.healthnet.org'.
For additional assistance, send mail to: `owner-e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'.