PHA-Exchange> Patents and public health

[Claudio]

From: PHM - Secretariat 

  
Patents, Intellectual Property Rights, Unjust Trade and 

Public Health

 

 



Public interest organizations and pro people health movement have been concerned about the public health consequences of the TRIPS regime.


Many individuals and organizations have worked on it for long.


The TRIPS regime has been identified as one of the most unjust international trade regimes. Resistance to it as well as to WTO (earlier known as GATT) and the Dunkel Draft with ONLY a TAKE IT or LEAVE IT option given to developing countries) has come from farmers, public interest and human rights-minded social action groups, drug and health activists.

 

It was the pressure of trade sanctions under the US Trade and Omnibus Act of 1988 that made many countries like India sign on the dotted line, inspite of widespread protests from farmers and peoples organizations.

 


A TRIPS review was due in 2000, but HAS NOT TAKEN PLACE yet.  WHO has been aware and concerned about problems of access and cost of medicines. The difficulties faced by South Africa, Brazil, Thailand in implementing the TRIPS safeguards clearly shows that TRIPS is about trade and commerce rather than about PUBLIC HEALTH.

 

It was the pressure of the Aids activists and rational drug activists that forced the large patent holding pharma companies and their governments to give up some of their unethical pressure tactics.

 

The cost of anti retroviral drugs annual treatment regimes was forced down from $15000/year to $350/year with cheaper generic drugs  making genuine equivalents available to people showing a people-before-profit-attitude. .

 


In India, a large number of organisations are working on HIV/AIDS, but  very few on the issue of 'right to health and right to essential medicines at affordable costs' - the latter concerns have unfortunately not recieved the urgent attention they deserve. Intervention by public interest groups and citizens is indispensible if any bill is being discused on TRIPS issues; no bill can be accepted unchallenged.

 


Large MNCs that were involved in formulation of the TRIPS document and getting it through the GATT secretariat as an official GATT position continued their pressure through their governments and WTO, as well as in Brazil, Argentina, India and Thailand; pressures have also been used through the World Bank and IMF.



 

Unless the public health implications of the TRIPS and WTO are understood by a larger number of organizations and individuals involved in health work, they will not come forward to speak up and have their voices counted, as the space for intervention CLOSES.

 

Many of the suggestions made by public-minded groups do NOT get considered/incorporated and many of the concerns related to safeguards are not included, because they 'create problems  to vested interests and challenge industry with their army of patent lawyers and large financial resources.

 

We must demand:

 

1.      A TRIPS review overdue since 2002. If commitments made to the developing countries are not kept, why should they be pressured to continue taking decisions against their own national interest?

2.     Public health, public interest groups and the people's health movement must be given voice and be heard.

3.    Only new chemical entities should be granted patents. No patent for new use of old drugs, new formulations, new dosage forms. (This is beyond the TRIPS obligations).

4      The Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health was meant to safeguard public health interest. Para '6' regarding medicines for Least Developed Countries with little or no manufacturing capability was to have been worked out within a time frame now overdue. (The August 30 decision of TRIPS General Council permits, grant of compulsory licenses for allowing drug exports to LDCs with little or no manufacturing capabilities).

 The proposed regulations permit exports to a country with little or no manufacturing capacity, provided there is an corresponding patent in the IMPORTING COUNTRY. This expectation is UNREALISTIC as LDCs have upto 2016 to comply with TRIPS and many may not have compulsory licensing in their National Patent Laws .


The drug exports need strengthening first because of the national economy and industry being able to keep domestic prices down, but also because many poorer countries wanting to import drugs are in debt, have limited resources and could serve larger proportion of their citizens with medicines much needed at lower costs.



5.      Many countries and public interest groups have clearly indicated their positions that there should be no patent on life. Patenting of micro organisms, non biologicals and micro biological processes are still under TRIPS review. 

 

6.      Definitions of national emergency, health emergency, environmental emergency need to be spelt out clearly; with 1000 deaths per day with HIV/AIDS in Africa. HIV/AIDS as national emergency was still denied. Post Doha US tried to push for the definition of public health to mean HIV/AIDS, TB and malaria. It was because of protests by drug and health activists and some developing countries that this was changed. 

  

Dr. Mira Shiva

Director (Women Health & Development and Rational Drug Policy)

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20041202/cdfeb552/attachment-0001.html>