PHA-Exchange> Doha & EU

[Dr. Gopal Dabade]

Dear friends,
Greetings from BUKO Pharma-Kampagne,Germany
We have been following the EU meetings
http://trade-info.cec.eu.int/civil_soc/intro1.php at Brussels on Access to
Medicines.
I am here with sending the correspondence that we had with the EU
commissioner, which are as follows:-
1) Letter written by BUKO Pharma-Kampagne dated 13th February 2003 to EU
Commissioner.
2) Response from the EU Commissioner dated 27th February 2003.
3) Reply by BUKO Pharma-Kampagne to EU Commissioner dated 11th March 2003.

It appears EU is trying to push an US agenda, towards restricting and
undermining the Doha Declaration, by suggesting a restricted list of
diseases and also that WHO should be consulted.
We urge you to write a  letter or fax a letter to commissioner not to
undermine the decision of the Doha declaration.
The address of the EU commissioner is:-
Commissaire-Lamy at cec.eu.int

Postal address :
200, rue de la Loi
B - 1049 Brussels
Belgium

Fax :
+32/2/298.13.99

We would appreciate having a copy of your letter. Since the EU commissioner
is to
meet the Civil Society om 25th March, I would urge you to send at the
earliest,
--
From;
Dr. Gopal Dabade
BUKO Pharma-Kampagne,
August Bebel Str 62,
D 33602 Bielefeld,
Germany
Tel +49 521 60550,
Fax +49 521 63789
www.bukopharma.de



1)LETTER TO EU COMMISSIONER FROM BUKO PHARMA-KAMPAGNE DATED 13th FEBRUARY
2003:-
13.2.2003
To,
Pascal Lamy,
Commissioner for Trade,
European Commission,
Rue de la Loi 200,
B-1049 Brussels,
Belgium.
Dear Pascal Lamy,
	This letter expresses concerns over your initiatives to break the current
deadlock on the access to essential medicines. In your letter dated 7th
January 2003 to the WTO Trade Ministers, you suggest a limited list of
infectious disease for developing countries. This undermines the basic
statement of the Doha declaration, which clearly states that countries with
no capabilities of manufacturing should be able to decide, depending on the
public health crises.
	It is unfortunate that this list of diseases, that has been produced by
your commission is the list that has been promoted by the United States of
American government, and so obviously representing the interests of the
United States of America. This list is extremely arbitrary and has no
relevance, as it does not look at the real health issues that are at stake
and most importantly, it also takes away the right of the developing
countries to decide on health issues which are of major concerns to them, as
they are the best to decide on issues which concern them.
	The list of diseases that has been proposed by you also does not include
diseases like cancer, diabetes and others which are also a major public
health problems in developing countries.
	If the discussions on important public health issues are hijacked by EU and
USA in such fashion then inevitable the Fifth Session of its Ministerial
Conference, to be held in Cancun, Mexico, in September 2003, will land up
being another revival of the Seattle meeting, in which huge demonstrations
only marred the proceedings of the WTO ministerial.
	Keeping this experience in mind we are sure you will reconsider the
statements made by you as this issue of Doha declaration concerns life of
million of people and it could lead to an international trade crisis thus it
would make a bleak picture for WTO in future.

	We strongly believe and urge you to give up making proposals that would
restrict the agreement on compulsory licences to a limited list of diseases
and even involving the World Health Organization in assessing public health
concerns simply constitutes an unacceptable attempt to restrict developing
countries’ use of compulsory licensing. We firmly assert that the scope of
diseases was already extensively discussed in Doha, and the consensus text
included in the Doha declaration rejects any limitations.
	With best wishes.
From;
Dr. Gopal Dabade, BUKO Pharma-Kampagne
--
Dr. Gopal Dabade
BUKO Pharma-Kampagne,
August Bebel Str 62,
D 33602 Bielefeld,
Germany
Tel +49 521 60550,
Fax +49 521 63789
www.bukopharma.de

2)LETTER FROM EU COMMISSIONER DATED 27th FEBRUARY 2003:-
27.2.2003
Letter to BUKO received 5 March 2003
PASCAL LAMY
MEMBRE DE LA COMMISSION EUROPEENNE
RUE DE LA LOI, 200, B-1049 BRUXELLES
Brussels, 27 February 2003 IG/mc D (2003) 829
Dear Dr. Dabade,
Thank you for your letter of 13 February 2003 on the issue of TRIPS and
Public health.
I fully concur with you that the disease scope of the decision on compulsory
licensing for countries without manufacturing capacity should be that of the
Doha Declaration. Therefore, I fear that the concerns you raise in your
letter are based on a misunderstanding of the EU's position. The EU is by no
means trying to limit the diseases covered by, the system. What the EU is
trying to do is to propose a solution that would allow for a quick
resolution of this matter.
The EU has accepted the draft agreement of 16 December 2002 in its entirety,
including its scope, which is based entirely on the Doha Declaration. I
regret that no consensus could be found around this text, and I cannot
countenance the possibility that the TRIPS health negotiations might end in
failure. I remain convinced that a multilateral solution must be found as
soon as possible, and that the 16 December text remains the best basis for a
deal. This is the concern underlying my 7 January proposal.
I would like to make one thing quite clear from the outset: for the EU the
Doha mandate is deliberately broad in its scope and that breadth must be
respected. In short, the WTO mechanism for gaining access to medicines can
and must be activated whenever there is a serious public health problem.
However, we must not lose sight of the political reality. The fact of the
matter is that there is one WTO Member that does not trust other WTO members
to use the system in good faith. This demands a neutral arbiter, which is
why I have proposed to involve the WHO, whose experience in public health
matters is undisputed.
This would give us an agreement offering the coverage called for in the Doha
Declaration. As for the practicalities of the agreement's implementation,
there would henceforth be a universally recognised presumption that AIDS,
malaria and a long list of other diseases are normally covered by the
agreement.
This list is not, however, exhaustive or restrictive. It is just a list of
diseases which even the US has in the past admitted should be covered by the
system, a list that could be applied without objections from any quarter.
But the system's use would not and should not be confined to the diseases on
that list. This is very important, and there must be no misunderstanding on
this score.
In the event of any other serious public health problem, the implementing
arrangements would be slightly different : wherever there were doubts about
a measure's legitimacy, WTO members could turn to the WHO for an expert
medical opinion. The possibility of obtaining an opinion (not a binding
ruling) from the WHO should help dispel the US’s misgivings about the
system's use by the developing countries. I must underline that this would
be and advice, not an arbitrage, in full conformity with WYO [should read
WHO; comment by BUKO] role to give advice to governments.
My 7 January proposal has led to further discussions in Geneva, which was
one of its objectives. Discussions are continuing, and the EU is making all
efforts it can to restore a climate of confidence among parties.
Finally, I have to admit that I am a little bit perplexed by the content of
your letter. When  I launched my proposal, I have made my intention very
clear, and these intentions have been further clarified by myself and by my
services at several occasions, be it in the press, the European Parliament
and, last but not least, in the context of the Commission's meeting with
civil society on 30 January 2003, which you attended yourself. I therefore
regret that there have been continuing attempts to mislead the public on the
positions taken by the EU and on the reservations underlying its action. I
sincerely hope that this letter contributes to dispelling any
misunderstanding that may still exist.
I am copying this letter to European Public Health Alliance, Médecins sans
Frontières and Oxfam International and I will publish it on the website of
the Commission's Directorate General for Trade.
Yours sincerely,
Pascal LAMY

3)REPLY TO LAMY'S LETTER FROM BUKO PHARMA-KAMPAGNE DATED 11 MARCH 2003:-
EU Commissioner
Pascal Lamy,
rue de la Loi, 200
B-1049 Brussels
Belgium

Doha and Public Health
11th March 2003
Dear Mr. Lamy,
	Thanks for your letter of 27th February 2003, which was in response to my
earlier letter dated 13th February 2003, regarding Doha declaration and
Public Health.
	We appreciate that you make “quite clear from the outset: for the EU the
Doha mandate is deliberately broad in its scope and that breadth must be
respected. In short, the WTO mechanism for gaining access to medicines can
and must be activated whenever there is a serious public health problem.”
	While fully appreciating EU stand for the Doha declaration and its scope of
the decision on the compulsory licensing for countries without manufacturing
capacity we insist it should be only that of the Doha declaration and there
should be imposed no additional hurdles.
	Unfortunately the essence of Doha Declaration is diluted when you try to be
more anxious to attend to the distrust of one WTO member. In fact your
letter gives contradicting messages. You point out that Doha Declaration has
to be accepted in entirety, which is the demand of the developing countries.
In the next paragraphs you dilute the stand on Doha. The substance of the
Doha declaration is firm and clear, as the scope of the diseases was already
extensively discussed in Doha and the consensus text included in the Doha
declaration rejects any limitation that you are suggesting.
	By suggesting a list of diseases you are taking away the sovereignty of the
countries, to decide what is relevant and appropriate for their health care
system. For that reason we disagree that the “16 December text” would be a
good solution.
	The suggestion of yours to include WHO in the decision making process, only
further dilute the Doha declaration, as it takes the away the sovereignty of
the countries in their decision for public health, as it is guaranteed in
the Doha declaration. We ask you to withdraw from the concept of a list of
diseases and from a third party (WHO) to decide about a need of any country
for a compulsory licence. Any additional restriction further complicating
the anyway difficult process of compulsory licensing is unacceptable, it is
against the health needs of the poorest countries.
	While appreciating your statement that “the scope of the decision on
compulsory licensing for countries without manufacturing capacity should be
that of the Doha Declaration”, we would strongly recommend to you that the
EU should act in the best interest of the people whose lives are at stake
and not to “dispel the US’s misgivings”.
	We firmly recommend a solution under § 30 of the TRIPS agreement, which is
the solution in favour of the developing countries, as demanded by them and
many NGOs.
	Fully knowing the gravity of the problem, I hope you will re look at the
issue. I hope I have cleared your doubts on the issue and look for an open
letter from your office pledging full and unaltered support for the Doha
declaration.

Your sincerely

Dr. Gopal Dabade

Copies to: German Ministry of Health (Klaus Theo Schröder), Ministry of
Economic Cooperation and Development (Dr. Uschi Eid), Ministry of Economic
Affairs (Dr. Axel Gerlach and Arno Schwed), Ministry of Law (Dr. Hansjörg
Geiger), MSF, Aids-Kampagne, PHM and HAI.