E-drug: Financial Times on TRIPS
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Copied as fair use. HH]
Battle over drugs prices shifts to the WTO
By Frances Williams
19 June 2001
The battleground between health groups and pharmaceutical giants
over the high price of life-saving drugs in poor countries shifts on
Wednesday to the World Trade Organisation in Geneva, which is
holding its first debate on the WTO's intellectual property
agreement and affordable medicines. Calling for the debate last
April, the WTO's African members said the WTO's accord on
trade-related aspects of intellectual property (TRIPS) faced a "crisis
of legitimacy". The 1994 accord, which requires countries to
introduce patent protection legislation, is blamed by health activists
for bolstering the interests of the multinational pharmaceutical
companies and keeping the costs of essential drugs, especially
those for Aids, out of reach of the poor.
One-third of the world's population lacks access to basic medicines,
and groups such as Oxfam and M�decins Sans Fronti�res say the
introduction of patent protection for drugs, which most developing
countries had to implement by the beginning of 2000, has made
matters worse by raising prices and reducing access.
Implementation of TRIPS by the poorest countries by 2006 "may be
expected to have further serious consequences for the availability at
affordable prices of new essential medicines" , Ellen't Hoen of MSF
said on Tuesday. The charge is denied by the pharmaceutical
industry which points out that even when drugs are offered at cost
price or free of charge, countries often lack the infrastructure and
funding to distribute and prescribe them. "Patents are not the
problem," says Harvey Bale of the International Federation of
Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Associations (IFPMA). In fact, the
TRIPS agreement contains a wide range of safeguards to protect
public health, including the possibility of overriding patents through
compulsory licensing or parallel imports. But the World Health
Organisation says "the flexibility in the TRIPS agreement is not
being used". The accord recognises the need in national legislation
to balance the interests of patent holders and the public, and says
specifically that countries may "adopt measures necessary to
protect public health and nutrition".
Grounds for compulsory licensing can include not just national
emergencies such as epidemics, but the public interest, public
non-commercial use and abuse of patent rights by the holder. TRIPS
also says disputes on parallel imports cannot be taken to the WTO's
dispute settlement system. However, for several years the US
continued to threaten trade sanctions against countries such as
Thailand and South Africa that were revising legislation to
incorporate TRIPS safeguards. It was only in 1999, after Aids
activists dogged the presidential campaign of vice-president Al
Gore, that the Clinton administration announced it would no longer
oppose measures consistent with TRIPS, a policy that President
George W. Bush has pledged to continue.
Even so, health groups say the US is still exerting pressure, for
instance in negotiations on the Free Trade Agreement of the
Americas, on countries to forgo or weaken TRIPS safeguards. The
big pharmaceutical companies have threatened to withdraw
investment from Brazil and other countries if they use compulsory
licensing. Activists also point to the decision by 39 pharmaceutical
companies to challenge South Africa's medicines act which
encourages use of generic drugs and provides for compulsory
licensing and parallel imports. Though the companies were
eventually shamed into a humiliating climbdown, the pending case
made other countries nervous of following South Africa's lead. The
US has also filed a WTO complaint against provisions in Brazil's
patent law requiring local production of a patented product within
three years under threat of compulsory licensing. Health and
development groups claim the US action could jeopardise Brazil's
successful Aids programme. The US denies it is targeting Brazil's
health policies, for which there are specific provisions in the patent
legislation that are not under challenge. However, Brazil says the
provisions on compulsory licensing are an essential part of its health
strategy.
Over 100 non-governmental organisations on Tuesday urged
Wednesday's WTO meeting to adopt a seven-point strategy,
including a moratorium on dispute settlement action, an agreement
not to put pressure on developing countries to forgo their TRIPS
rights, and an extended TRIPS implementation deadline for the
poorest countries. "Discussions on schemes such as 'differential
pricing' or a global fund for Aids should not distract from, or be a
substitute for, the need for action on patents and the TRIPS
agreement," the statement said.
--
Send mail for the `E-Drug' conference to `e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'.
Information and archive http://www.healthnet.org/programs/edrug.html
Mail administrative requests to `majordomo@usa.healthnet.org'.
For additional assistance, send mail to: `owner-e-drug@usa.healthnet.org'.