PHM-Exch> Sign-on: TPPA & access to medicines

[Patricia Morton]

Dear PHM Representatives from Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, 
Peru , Singapore, United States and Vietnam
 
A trade agreement is currently being negotiated between these countries which 
has the potential to impact significantly on 

access to medicines in these countries. 
 
PHM-OZ and the Public Health Association of Australia have just signed the 
letter below. We encourage civil society groups and 

public health associations from these countries to sign up. Please send any 
questions to Peter Maybarduk (cc’d).
  
Regards
Patricia
PHM Oz and PHAA
  
 


-------- Original Message -------- 
Subject:  [TPP-ALLIES] Sign-on: TPPA & access to medicines - Request for 
organizational endorsements 

Date:  Mon, 7 Feb 2011 10:52:52 -0500 
From:  Peter Maybarduk <pmaybarduk at CITIZEN.ORG> 
Reply-To:  Peter Maybarduk <pmaybarduk at CITIZEN.ORG> 
To:  TPP-ALLIES at LISTSERVER.CITIZEN.ORG 
 
Dear TPPA-Allies, 
Please see the sign-on letter below regarding "Safeguarding Access to Medicines 
in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement," addressed to the Trade Ministers of 
the TPPA negotiating countries. (See the revisions we have made to the Trade 
Minister list.)  We will present the letter with organizational endorsements to 
negotiators at the upcoming Santiago round, February 14-18, 2011. 

  
If your organization would like to sign-on, please notify us via this email 
address no later than Monday, February 14.  

  
Thank you, and please feel free to contact me with any questions. 
Peter Maybarduk
Public Citizen
  
  
----
  
February 15, 2011
  
  
Hon. Craig Emerson, Trade Minister
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Australia 
  
  
H.R.H. Prince Mohamed Bolkiah, Minister 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Brunei Darussalam 
  
  
Hon. Alfredo Moreno Charme, Minister 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile 
  
  
YAB Datuk Seri Mustapa Mohamed, Minister
Ministry of International Trade and Industry, Malaysia
  
  
Hon. Tim Groser, Trade Minister 
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of New Zealand 
  
  
Hon. Eduardo Ferreyros, Minister 
Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism of Peru 
  
  
Hon. Lim Hng Kiang, Minister 
Ministry of Trade and Industry of Singapore 
  
  
Amb. Ronald Kirk, Trade Representative 
Office of the United States Trade Representative 
  
  
Hon. Vu Huy Hoang, Minister
Ministry of Industry and Trade, Vietnam
  
  
  
Re: Safeguarding Access to Medicines in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement
  
  
Dear Trade Ministers,
  
  
We, the undersigned civil society organizations, write to you regarding 
intellectual property provisions in the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership 
Agreement (TPPA).  We are concerned that intellectual property measures that may 
be included in an eventual agreement could undermine patients’ access to vital 
medicines, and contravene promises of a new trade model and “21st century” 
agreement.  

  
  
Nearly two billion people still lack regular access to medicines in developing 
countries.  Although several important factors contribute to this, one critical 
problem is the high price of monopolized medicines.  Intellectual property 
provisions that go beyond the standard required by the World Trade 
Organization’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property 
(WTO’s TRIPS) – so-called “TRIPS-plus” measures – restrict generic competition, 
leading to medicine prices that are unaffordable for most people, and healthcare 
costs that can restrict health programs’ abilities to provide treatment or other 
services, in both developing and wealthier countries.  

  
  
The parties should seek to end the harmful impact of trade agreements on access 
to medicines.  In the past, the United States (among other countries) has 
negotiated trade agreements imposing TRIPS-plus measures on trading partners, 
and limiting flexibilities that could otherwise help promote cost-lowering 
competition.  

  
  
Therefore, the best result for many parties to the Trans-Pacific Partnership 
Agreement may be no intellectual property or pharmaceuticals provisions at all. 

  
  
Nevertheless, we urge countries that are considering intellectual property 
chapters in the TPPA to table alternatives to the TRIPS-plus model, including 
forward-looking proposals that would:
  
  
*   Establish TRIPS as the maximum standard of substantive protection required 
by the TPPA and preexisting trade agreements in the region, and
  
  
*   Assist the effective implementation of TRIPS flexibilities.  
  
  
We are available to discuss these proposals and some suggested components in 
detail.  

  
  
The U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement, the most recent U.S. trade agreement to 
be ratified and implemented, benefited from an historic agreement between the 
U.S. Congress and the previous administration.  This May 10th, 2007 agreement 
achieved an unprecedented reversal in the decade-long trend of increasingly 
severe intellectual property provisions.  Intellectual property provisions in 
the U.S.-Peru agreement make patent term extensions and patent linkage voluntary 
instead of mandatory, and place limits on the term and scope of data 
exclusivity.  

  
  
The May 10th agreement fell short of adequately addressing access to medicines 
concerns.  Its provisions, including data exclusivity, still imposed new costs 
on public health.  Nevertheless, it represented an important progression in U.S. 
policy.  The other TPPA parties should insist that any intellectual property 
text tabled by the United States build on this progress, beginning by 
eliminating data exclusivity requirements.  Data exclusivity requirements 
compromise access to medicines and are inconsistent with ethical standards 
regarding the duplication of tests on humans or vertebrate animals.
  
  
Under no circumstances should the TPPA undermine the May 10th agreement by 
insisting on stricter intellectual property measures than those included in the 
US-Peru FTA.  Under no circumstances should the TPPA require accession or 
adherence to the terms of the controversial proposed Anti-Counterfeiting Trade 
Agreement (ACTA).  And under no circumstances should the TPPA impose procedural 
or substantive restrictions on the ability of government agencies, including 
those at the state level, to regulate drug prices through reimbursement 
policies.     

  
  
New Zealand’s recent TPPA proposal states the parties “should be cautious about 
moving beyond TRIPS standards under [the] TPP,” noting that “there is a tendency 
towards overprotection of IP in all our societies, particularly in the areas of 
copyright and patents.” New Zealand proposes an alternative “TRIPS-aligned” 
structure, focusing on operational coherence and enforcement, and 
capacity-building in developing countries.  We applaud New Zealand for 
introducing this alternate vision.  

  
  
New Zealand’s proposal is a better starting point for any regional IP 
negotiation than the U.S.-sponsored TRIPS-plus status quo.  There are still 
dangers in each of New Zealand’s proposed focus areas, including considerably 
increasing the bias of IP enforcement policy toward rights holders.  This 
reveals the risks inherent in negotiating any intellectual property or 
pharmaceuticals provisions in the TPPA.  But New Zealand’s paper also reflects 
growing awareness of the dangers of TRIPS-plus measures and rigid exclusive 
rights in many countries.  

  
  
A 21st century agreement must not accept harmful 20th century terms.  Instead, 
the TPPA should look forward to new, open and flexible policy models.  The TPPA 
should facilitate, rather than impede, the parties honoring their commitments to 
access and innovation.  The TPPA should preserve countries’ options to “explore 
and, where appropriate, promote a range of incentive schemes for research and 
development including addressing, where appropriate, the de-linkage of the costs 
of research and development and the price of health products,” in accordance 
with World Health Assembly Resolution 61.21.  

  
  
Finally, the TPPA must respect the WTO’s 2001 Doha Declaration on the TRIPS 
Agreement and Public Health – not only in principle, but in practice – including 
specifically Doha’s guarantee that “the [TRIPS] Agreement can and should be 
interpreted and implemented in a manner supportive of WTO Members' right to 
protect public health and, in particular, to promote access to medicines for 
all.” 

  
  
Broad public consultation, input and review of proposed agreement terms will be 
essential to safeguarding the sensitive public health interests at stake. We 
urge the TPPA parties to agree in Chile to release the draft texts and 
associated country papers after each negotiating round.  

  
  
We look forward to discussing these issues further.  Please direct inquiries to 
Peter Maybarduk at Public Citizen, 1600 20th Street NW, Washington, D.C. 20009, 
USA, pmaybarduk at citizen.org, tel. +1 (202) 588-1000.  

  
  
Sincerely,
  
  
[Groups]
  
  
Public Citizen
  
Peruvian Network for Globalization with Equity (RedGE)


      
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://phm.phmovement.org/pipermail/phm-exchange-phmovement.org/attachments/20110211/0a04e07c/attachment.html>