PHA-Exchange> 100 nations debate: Right to Health or Right to Wealth? IGWG Geneva meeting report

[claudio at hcmc.netnam.vn]

 from Garance Upham <g_upham at club-internet.fr> -----
   
Nations debate:

RIGHT TO HEALTH OR RIGHT TO WEALTH?

The Summary:

The Intergovernmental Working Group on Public Health, Innovation and 
Intellectual Property (IGWG) met in Geneva the week of 
December 4-8, about a 100 Member States attended.
The convening of the group came as a result of a mandate given by the World 
Health Assembly, the sovereign decision body for world 
health policy, in resolution 59.24, in which developing countries led by 
Brazil and Kenya demanded that WHO examine new ways to 
guaranty access to health for poor people. The  Commission on Intellectual 
Property, innovation and IP (CIPIH report) which was 
supposed to review these issues just published its findings.

In the course of the IGWG meeting, the majority of the countries in the world 
stated that present day global patent system of 
intellectual property rights, - the implementation of the TRIPS agreement of 
WTO – is incompatible with the superior Right to 
Health of populations.

	Flexibilities embodied in the TRIPS agreement itself, and then 
furthered in the Doha Ministerial agreement of the Trade 
Ministers agreement of 2001, are insufficient, and generally LMIC countries 
are prevented from having recourse to these 
flexibilities. Rich countries, notably the United States, are notorious for 
imposing TRIPS +, or TRIPS ++, meaning stricter 
obedience to patent property rights than even the original TRIPS of the World 
Trade Organization proposed.

	Developing countries argue with evidence that the pharmaceutical 
corporations are cheating (ever greening of patents, refusal to 
give access to data to allow for generic production when patents expire, 
etc.) , and that rich countries behavior, notably that of 
the US government, which is imposing TRIPS ++ in bilateral trade agreements, 
is supportive of WTO trade agreements to enrich 
corporations, and stalling on demands to look at new ways to foster 
innovation, share knowledge, and support public health.

	The system of patents whereby today 97% of patents are owned by 
corporations in rich countries, is conducing to large 
accumulation of wealth by monopolies (such as Microsoft), but has failed to 
prove that it is a system favoring innovation.

	Alternative systems including pooling of patents and the proposal for 
a global R&D Treaty (initially put forth by the NGO 
specialized in IP: CPTECH, that would do away with the present patent system 
altogether, is gaining support.

In conclusion, the majority of the member States of World Health Assembly: 
Brazil, Thailand, India, Iran, Kenya, (the later three 
respectively speaking for the SEARO, EMRO and AFRO regions Member States are 
allied in proposing to seek alternative systems to 
favor R&D and the sharing of knowledge by all of humanity, as most urgent 
today.
Only alternative mechanisms will allow for research to go into neglected 
diseases research, will favor innovation and guaranty 
ACCESS to medicines and other essential goods for the populations of the world.

The objectives of public health are stated as incompatible with the TRIPS 
agreement of the WTO. The World Health Organization 
(WHO) is mandated by the World Health Assembly to examine the situation 
created by TRIPS/WTO as regards public health, and to come 
up with alternatives to safeguard the right to health.


Of Sparrows and Eagles: when the majority of countries challenge the patent 
system as incompatible with the Right to Health. 
(REPORT CONTINUES WITH MEMBER STATES INTERVENTIONS AND NGO INPUTS.  
DOCUMENT AVAILABLE FROM GARANCE UPHAM)

------------------------------------------------------------------
This mail sent through Netnam-HCMC ISP: http://www.hcmc.netnam.vn/