E-DRUG: NGOs Protest Against AFrica IP Summit
---------------------------------------------
Below is a NGO letter protesting against the upcoming Africa IP Summit.
Background:
The US government is planning to hold in April an Africa IP Summit in partnership with Japan, France, and WIPO. South Africa is hosting this meeting.
The main focus of this Summit is enhanced IP protection and enforcement particularly on counterfeiting and piracy.The private sector (ICC, BASCAP,Pfizer, Eli Lily et al) is sponsoring this meeting. Clearly this is a platform for US, Japan France to promote the TRIPS plus plus agendas seen in ACTA, TPPA, EPA etc, and this Summit will be promoting more anti-counterfeiting bills in Africa.
As seen in the case of anti-counterfeiting bills in East Africa, many of the provisions are likely to have a problematic impact on the ability to use flexibilities to meet development objectives and public interests issues such as access to medicines, access to knowledge, freedom of expression over the internet.
So in protest many NGOs have written a letter to WIPO raising a number of their concerns.
The concept paper for this meeting is available at : http://www.cldp.doc.gov/programs/Africa-intellectual-property-forum
The latest programme of the Summit is available on Thiru's blog: http://keionline.org/node/1351
Sangeeta Shashikant
Third World Network
<ssangeeta@myjaring.net>
NGO PROTEST LETTER AGAINST AFRICA IP SUMMIT http://www.ghwatch.org/sites/www.ghwatch.org/files/AfricaIPSummit2012_0207.pdf
7th February 2012
Mr. Francis Gurry Director General World Intellectual Property Organization Africa IP Summit: Lacking a Development Dimension Dear Mr. Gurry, In 2004, the WIPO Development Agenda was launched amidst significant concerns that WIPO¹s activities lacked a development dimension, undermined public interest, while promoting the interests of IP holders. The Development Agenda received widespread global support leading to the adoption of 45 Development Agenda recommendations in 2007.
We believe that at the core of these recommendations is the need for WIPO to ensure that a balanced and evidence based agenda on intellectual property is promoted taking into account the different levels of development and public interest considerations. Principles of transparency and avoiding of conflicts of interests also underpin these recommendations.
In view of this, we note with significant disappointment and concern the context in which the upcoming Africa IP Summit will be held. Some key concerns are:
Conflicts of Interest: It is worrying to see that a major event such as an Africa wide forum is being co-organised in partnership with US, France and Japan. These governments are known for advocating TRIPS plus agendas in developing countries in the interests of their own industries and priorities. For instance these countries are proponents of the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA), a plurilateral treaty that is widely criticized for its secret negotiating process and the detrimental impact on public interest issues such as access to medicines, freedom of expression over the internet and access to knowledge. One key aim of the treaty is to export these problematic IP enforcement standards to developing countries.
These countries also promote TRIPS plus standards through Free Trade Agreements such as through the Economic Partnership Agreements, and the recent Trans Pacific Partnership negotiations. It is widely known that the different TRIPS plus standards advocated to, and in many cases imposed on to developing countries, will have devastating consequences for development including on access to affordable medicines, freedom of expression over the internet and access to knowledge. These standards are imposed to ³kick away the ladder² for developing countries and to protect the interests of certain influential domestic actors. In view of this, WIPO¹s partnership with these countries to host an Africa wide IP Summit amounts to conflict of interests and is simply unacceptable.
To make matters worse the Summit is being sponsored by the private sector in particular the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), Business Action to Stop Counterfeiting and Piracy (BASCAP), Pfizer, Eli Lilly and Company etc., that clearly have a strong stake in a pro-IP protection and enforcement agenda . The involvement of the private sector also raises issues of conflict of interests.
WIPO being an intergovernmental and a specialized agency of the UN must take immediate measures to ensure that all its activities are evidence based, free of conflicts of interests and undue influence of actors that are known to promote an unbalanced IP agenda.
Lacking a development and public interest dimension: The Africa IP Summit concept paper suggests a programme that undermines the spirit of Development Agenda. It is premised on the notion that heightened IP protection and enforcement will deliver development and protect public interest. This distorted approach has no historical or empirical basis and has been clearly rejected by the Development Agenda process. Important development issues such as the different levels of development, the importance of flexibilities (e.g. LDC transition periods, exceptions and limitations (e.g. parallel importation, compulsory licensing,) in meeting developmental objectives, examining and addressing the impact of IP on critical public interests issues such as access to affordable medicines, and access to knowledge, appear to be disregarded.
Even more worrying is that the Summit aims to promote the link between IP enforcement and public health and safety, presumably to frighten people into accepting inappropriate standards of IP enforcement agenda. We stress that an IP enforcement framework will not deliver effective public health protection as IP rights are not granted on the basis of the quality and safety of the product. Instead inappropriate standards of IP enforcement are likely to hinder public health such as access to affordable medicines. This has been amply demonstrated by the many seizures of quality generic medicines in transit at various European ports.
Lobbying by some multinational companies and their developed country governments in linking IP enforcement to public health has led to a proliferation of anti-counterfeiting bills in many African countries as well as at the regional level, most notably in East Africa. The enactment of these bills is usually promoted on public health grounds. However in reality these bills are only about protecting the rights of IP holders and are in fact ³TRIPS plus plus² in so many ways, containing provisions that undermine flexibilities and that are detrimental to national developmental objectives such as building local production capacity, scaling up access to affordable medicines and improving access to knowledge. For example, most of these bills define ³Counterfeit² products as being substantially similar or identical to IP protected products, which effectively makes every generic pharmaceutical a counterfeit. In Kenya, enactment of the Anti-Counterfeit Act 2008 has been challenged by people living with HIV/AIDS on the grounds that enforcement and application of the Act will deny them access to affordable essential medicines and thus deny their Right to Life.
Noting the controversies surrounding these bills, it is inappropriate for WIPO to be championing the strengthening of IP enforcement on alleged public health grounds.
Further we stress that addressing the issue of substandard, poor quality medicines (also often labeled as ³counterfeit medicines²) is not within the mandate of WIPO but a responsibility of the World Health Organization. Dealing with the problem of ³counterfeit medicines² requires a focus not on IP enforcement but on building regulatory capacity and ensuring access to affordable medicines. A process is already underway at the WHO to address this. Apart from medicines, it is also not within WIPO¹s mandate to deal with other poor quality, substandard products thus it is surprising that the Africa IP Summit is heavily focused on this issue.
Lack of Transparency & Information: According to available information, the WIPO and African regional IP organizations are key partners in the organization of the Africa IP Summit. However to date there appears to be no information available on WIPO¹s website about this Summit. This undermines implementation of the Development Agenda recommendation on transparency.
Further the US government website states that registration request will not guarantee participation and that the participants will be selected. However no information is being provided on the criteria that will be the basis for selection.
Following the above concerns, we demand that: WIPO postpone the holding of the Africa wide IP Summit. WIPO should also reconsider its partnership with the different interests involved and work to organize a balanced forum that is development oriented and upholds public interests as well as that is free of any conflicts of interests and influence of actors that tend to promote an unbalanced IP agenda. The process of organizing such a forum, (i.e. the selection of speakers, the drafting of the programme, criteria for selection of participants) should be transparent and all information should be promptly available on WIPO¹s website. Further we also call on WIPO to avoid partnering actors that tend to promote an unbalanced IP agenda in all its future activities.
cc.
1. Mr. Gift Sibanda Director General African Regional Intellectual Property Organization (ARIPO)
2. Mr. Paulin Edou Edou Director General African Intellectual Property Office (OAPI)
Signatories Act Up Paris Action Against AIDS,
Germany Akiba Uhaki Foundation, Kenya AIDES,
France AIDS Law Project,
Kenya All India Drug Action Network,
India Alternative Information and Development Centre (AIDC),
South Africa Alternative Agricultural Network,
Thailand AFASO,
Cameroon African Council of AIDS Service Organizations (AfriCASO),
Senegal African Services Committee,
US AIDS ACCESS Foundation,
Thailand ASAFE,
Cameroon Aseed Europe,
Amsterdam Association Alternative,
Côte d'Ivoire Association d'aide et de Protection des groupes Vulnerables du Centre Nord,
Burkina Faso Association des Femmes vivant avec le VIH / SIDA,
Mauritania Association de lutte contre le sida,
Maroc Association New Way+ Association de Protection Contre le Sida, (APCS),
Algerie Association soleil pour le soutien des enfants affectes et infectes par le VIH/ sida au Maroc Association Tunisienne de Lutte contre le Sida,
Tunis Bharatiya Krishak Samaj,
India The Center for Health,
Human Rights and Development,
Uganda Center for Encounter and active Non-Violence,
Austria Coalition 15%, Cameroon Coalition PLUS,
France Comite Regional de Promocion de Salud Comunitaria (CRPSC)
Consumers International
Cross River Farm Credit Scheme,
Nigeria Derechos Digitales,
Chile Diverse Women for Diversity,
India Drug Study Group,
Thailand Drug System Monitoring and Development Program,
Thailand Ecological Alert and Recovery ¬
Thailand (EARTH) Ecumenical Service for Peace,
Cameroon European AIDS Treatment Group (EATG),
Belgium. Fondation Femme Plus Kin,
République Démocratique du Congo Foundation for AIDS Rights,
Thailand Foundation for Consumers,
Thailand FTA Watch,
Thailand Health Consumers Protection Program,
Thailand Health and Development Foundation,
Thailand Health GAP (Global Access Project)
Health Action International Africa
HEPS-Uganda
Initiative for Medicines, Access & Knowledge, I-MAK
Initiative for Health & Equity in Society, India
Institute for economic research on innovation, South Africa
Ivorian Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS (RIP+)
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)
LGBTIQ Tanzania
Medsin, UK
Mozambique Network against Poverty, HIV/AIDS, Family Violence and Occupational Health Diseases, (ROCPA)
National Empowerment Network of PLHAs in Kenya (NEPHAK)
Navdanya, India
Network Togolese Association for Patients Safety (RETASEP)
Médecins Sans Frontières - Access Campaign
Médecins Sans Frontières, South Africa
Organisation Pan Africaine de lutte contre le Sida - Maroc (OPALS - Maroc)
Positive Generation, Cameroon
Peoples¹ Health Movement, Global
Peoples¹ Health Movement, Latin America
Peoples¹ Health Movement, South Africa
Réseau Accès aux Médicaments Essentiels (RAME)
Réseau des associations de PVVIH (RMAP+), Mauritania
Réseau Ethique, Droit et Sida (REDS), Yaoundé-Cameroun
Réseau Nigerien des Personnes Vivant Avec le VIH/SIDA(RENIP+)
Research Foundation for Science Technology & Ecology, India
Rural Pharmacists Foundation, Thailand
Rural Doctors Foundation, Thailand
Rural Doctor Society, Thailand
SEATINI, South Africa
Social Pharmacy Research Unit, Chulalongkorn University
Sidaction, France
Solthis, France
Thai Holistic Health Foundation
Thai NGO Coalition on AIDS
The Good Samaritan Social Service Tanzania
The Thai Network of People living with HIV/AIDS (TNP+)
Third World Network
Treatment Action Campaign, South Africa
Treatment Access Watch, Cameroon
Treatment Advocacy and Literacy Campaign (TALC), Zambia
Widevision et Droits de l'Homme, Cameroon,
3SH, Cameroon
Ayorinde P. Oduroye, Deputy Registrar/Secretary, School of Postgraduate Studies, Babcock University, Nigeria
Dr. Caroline B Ncube, Senior Lecturer, University of Cape Town
Dr. Leslie London, School of Public Health and Family Medicine, University of Cape Town
Dr. Louis Reynolds, Associate Professor, University of Cape Town
Esther Sandrine Ngom, IP Consultant, Cameroon
Hala Essalmawi, Principal Attorney, The Library of Alexandria (Bibliotheca Alexandrina)
Henry Zakumumpa, Makerere University
Margot Kaminsky, Executive Director of the Information Society Project at Yale Law School
Prof. Ikechi Mgbeoji, Osgoode Hall Law School, York University, Toronto, Canada
Prof. David Sanders, School of Public Health, University of the Western Cape
Sean Flynn, Associate Director, Program on Information Justice and Intellectual Property (PIJIP), American University Washington College of Law
Susan Sell, Professor of Political Science and International Affairs, George Washington University, Washington, DC
Yassin Tusingwire, East African research and Legal Chambers, Rwanda