E-DRUG: Negative impact EU-Andean FTA on access to medicines
------------------------------------------------------------
Joint Press Release: Health Action International and Oxfam
EU Commission pushes its trade agenda on Andean nations despite public
health consequences
16 June 2009- A new round of trade negotiations between the European
Union (EU) and a dwindling number of engaged Andean Community (CAN)
countries started yesterday in Bogota, Colombia. Whilst Colombia and
Peru remain at the table, Ecuador and Bolivia, original members of CAN,
have left or significantly decreased their involvement in the
deliberations because of their opposition to an emerging agenda that
focuses exclusively on trade issues and the EU's strong stance on
intellectual property (IP). The CAN-EU Alliance, a civil society
coalition of European and Latin American NGOs, are very concerned about
the public health consequences of the EU's IP demands.
According to studies conducted by Bogota-based IFARMA and Health Action
International (HAI), using a WHO methodology, the acceptance of the
European proposal on IP would cost the Colombians approximately 750
million USD annually. Strong IP enforcement measures, including
controversial border measures, would potentially lead to a further
decline in the trade in generic medicines, which could negatively affect
access to treatment.
The impact studies on Colombia found that patent extension and data
exclusivity provisions proposed by the EU would have dire consequences;
The number of medicines on the market under patent would rise from
approximately 8% to 21% of all the products on the market.
Governments and consumers would need to increase annual spending on
health by approximately 750 million USD.
Without this increased expenditure on health, more than 4.1 million
Colombians would lose access to essential medicines.
The EU is also insisting on a chapter in the text of the agreement on
the enforcement of IP rights. The chapter strengthens the protection of
IP rights and has the effect of restricting competition from cheaper,
generic medicines. Implementing such provisions to protect private
rights would impose significant financial cost to the state, and
therefore to the Colombian people, despite it being a public policy
priority of the EU rather than Colombia.
The chapter on enforcement includes the provision on border measures of
regulation 1383/2003 that recently led to the seizures of legitimate
generic medicines in transit to developing countries in the Netherlands
and in Germany. These provisions allow customs to check for IP
infringement in the country of transit, disregarding trade principles
such as freedom of transit and the territoriality of IP rights. By
hampering trade in generic medicines, these measures can have a negative
effect on access to medicines.
Sophie Bloemen from HAI Europe stated, ''it is inconceivable that the EU
could insist on these provisions, which will so clearly have negative
effects on public health in the Andean region. The fact that both
Bolivia and Ecuador are not accepting the EU's proposals on IP should be
an indication to the world of the EU's misplaced ambition to protect
their own industry and along the way, sacrifice the health of the poor
overseas''.
The negotiations are set against a backdrop of civil disquiet and unrest
that has resulted in well reported human rights abuses and even deaths
of indigenous peoples in Peru, who were protesting over the effects of
the implementation of the US Free Trade Agreement (FTA)." It seems that
for the EU negotiators, trade is more important than human rights.
For more information on this project, please contact Project Officer,
Sophie Bloemen at Sophie@haiweb.org