[A2k] (URGENT:Korea-US FTA) Seeking signatures on PUBLIC HEALTH comment

[IPLeft]

Dear all,


(You might have received an e-mail message that asks you to be a
cosignatory of a written comment on COPYRIGHT issues. This e-mail
message is about another written comment on PUBLIC HEALTH related
issues. Some of the issues are closely related with intellectual
property. The document also includes non-IP issues.)

South Korea and United States are preparing for the FTA negotiation.
Korean NGOs prepared a written comment (download at
http://www.ipleft.or.kr/fta/20060324-CoalitionLetterofNGOs-publichealth.pdf=
)
on public health issues that will be submitted to the USTR. Written
comments are due by noon, March 24, 2006 via e-mail. IPLeft is seeking
signatures from people and organizations in U.S on this comment.
People and organizations that want to join this effort and put their
names on the written comment, please reply to ipleft@jinbo.net with
their names and addresses (post address, Web site address or/and
e-mail address) BY MIDNIGHT, MARCH 23, 2006. If you know people or
organizations that might want to join as a cosignatory, please forward
this e-mail message to them.

Our major concern is that the South Korea-U.S. FTA will protect large
pharmaceutical companies' interests (or 'investments') at the cost of
eroding the base of public health system by heightening intellectual
property protection, forcing to change pharmaceutical pricing policy
and medical insurance policy, and so on.

We ask you to keep up on with the future development of the South
Korea-U.S. FTA negotiation and to be a part of this fight against it.

Best and solidarity,

Nam Hee-seob, Chairperson of Intellectual Property Left
Jungbongwon Bd. 5F, 502, 1-13,
Chungpa-dong 1ga,Yongsan-gu,
Seoul, Korea (140-868)
Website) http://www.ipleft.or.kr

--------------------------------------------------------------------
<Appendix> Korean and US NGOs Position Paper on Public Health and IPR in th=
e Korea-US FTA Negotiation


Korean and US NGOs Position Paper
on Public Health and IPR
in the Korea-US FTA Negotiation


=A1=DC Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) increase medical bills, aggravate healt=
h inequalities, and destroy people's health!
=A1=DC Stop Korea-US FTA negotiations now!


1. We can not approve the prior action to initiate the Korea-US FTA negotat=
ion.
Workers and people of Korea were furious at the result of the Korea-US phar=
maceutical negotiation. The meeting was a pre-condition to initiate Korea-U=
S FTA negotiation. According to the CRS report, Mr. Portman, who was the re=
presentative of USTR, announced in 2005 that Korea-US FTA negotiations woul=
d not be launched without progress on pharmaceutical issues. At the October=
 2005 trade action agenda meeting, the South Korean government (SKG) agreed=
 that no new drug reimbursement pricing policies would be introduced in the=
 near future, and that it would set up an independent mechanism under which=
 drug reimbursement decisions could be appealed. The SKG also concurred to =
clarify the reasons why the Korean Food and Drug Administration (KFDA) requ=
ired drug manufacturers of large amounts of proprietary data for the drug a=
pproval. It obviously means that the SKG would abandon the right to decide =
its own pharmaceutical medicine policy. By acknowledging these conditions, =
the SKG is try!
 ing to negotiate for the Korea-US FTA at the expenses of Korean people's h=
ealth and well-being. We, undersigned organizations, can not approve this s=
ituation and the FTA.


2. US should stop pressuring on South Korean pharmaceutical and health poli=
cy.
Through the annual publication of "National Trade Estimate Report on Foreig=
n Trade Barriers", the US Government has been asking and coercing the SKG t=
o amend health-related regulations such as the level of Korean Intellectual=
 Property protection, pharmaceutical policies and the protection of informa=
tion regarding pharmaceutical R&D. The US Government claims for differentia=
l acknowledgement for pharmaceutical products from the US drug companies. I=
t also insists that SKG change its pharmaceutical pricing policy in accorda=
nce to that of the US. In addition, simplification of required clinical tri=
al and safety test procedures and increase protection of intellectual prope=
rty right and exclusive rights to R&D information were demanded so that US =
pharmaceutical companies can access the South Korean market readily.
As the result, korean pharmaceutical price will soar, and health insurance =
budget could go bankrupt. What is more important is that the Korean people =
would not have any rights over the decision making process over the drug pr=
icing.
One representative case is the one in1999 when US called for the change in =
regulation regarding the pricing of innovative drugs. According to the US g=
overnment's opinion, price of these drugs should be in accordance with aver=
age factory price in 7 wealthiest countries (A-7: US UK Germany France Ital=
y Japan Switzerland). As a result, the US government succeeded and the SKG =
accepted theproposal.
Korean Leukemia patients suffered directly from this policy. They had to pa=
y about 2,500~6,300 thousand wons ($2,500~6,300) per month to Norvatis to t=
ake the anti-leukemic drug called "Glivec". Since this price was too high, =
they struggled against Norvatis for 2 years insisting for the disclosure of=
 actual manufacturing price and the reduction of the retail price. Despite =
the struggle, the patients, and the SKG which reimbursed part of the drug c=
ost, still had to pay much money to costly the drug due to formerly mention=
ed A-7 pricing system. All that was left to the leukemia patients was the r=
eality of death due not to lack of treatments, but of lack of money. Korean=
 health policy and system should be decided neither by US government nor by=
 pharmaceutical companies, but by people of Korea.


3. 'Transparency' for whom? For people of Korea or the US pharmaceutical co=
mpanies?
US insist that Korean patients want to take US pharmaceutical products but =
can not because of the corruption in Korean drug pricing  and health insura=
nce regulation. However, the transparency called for by the US, should be e=
xercised by the US pharmaceutical companies. They request extraordinary pri=
ce for new products making use of their exclusive intellectual property rig=
hts on innovative new drugs, without revealing the manufacturing cost. The =
US government insists that high drug price is necessary for the compensatio=
n of R&D cost, but they never disclose the actual cost for the manufacture =
and how much of it was proprieted from the public fund such as tax money. I=
n addition, the concept and policy of 'transparency' is based on standards =
in the US.
Pharmaceutical policies differ by country because countries' pharmaceutical=
 infrastructure, policy decision processes, cultural backgrounds and/or oth=
er relevant conditions vary. Therefore, forcing the US legal and health pol=
icy processes onto other countries is irrational.
We think that the 'corruption' or 'transparency problem' claimed by the US =
is its strategy to intercept Korean generic drug companies' development, wh=
ile US pharmaceutical company reap large profits from highly fixed drug pri=
ces. We want effective and affordable drugs. Moreover, we want them to be p=
roduced domestically. We are opposed to the reality where pharmaceutical pr=
oducts are regarded to be 'profitable goods'. Drugs should be for 'patients=
' lives'.


4. Heightened patent protection compelled by the US threatens patients' liv=
es
We can expect what the US would claim to Korea, based on previous US's agre=
ements with Central America, Singapore, Australia, and Thailand. Through th=
e "Glivec struggle" Korean people now know that the TRIPS(Trade-Related asp=
ects of Intellectual Property rights) Agreement threaten public's right to =
healthy lives.
However, the US tried to extend the protection period granted through the p=
atentsystem, limit the conditions under which compulsory licenses (CL) can =
be granted and to intercept market entrance of generic products by putting =
forward the exclusive rights on information. On November 4th, 2001, 4th WTO=
 Ministerial Conference adopted the "Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and=
 Public Health". The Doha Declaration stated, "The TRIPS Agreement does not=
 and should not prevent Members from taking measures to protect public heal=
th". What is proclaimed in the Doha Declaration is against current US gover=
nment's practice in Korea. The Doha Declaration made it clear that right to=
 (healthy) lives should be valued over (intellectual) property rightswhen t=
hey crash.

The reason why Thai HIV/AIDS patients are opposing US-Thailand FTA is becau=
se this would destory access to medicine. The US is demanding the Thai gove=
rnment to stop supplying cheaper and affordable HIV/AIDS drugs that are dom=
estically produced including the Government Pharmaceutical Organization (GP=
O).
Last year in Korea, we pushed for the amendment of patent law which would a=
llow 'compulsory licensing for public interset' and 'compulsory licensing f=
or exportation'. We will persistently look for various methods in order for=
 everyone to enjoy the right to their health. The US must not interfere wit=
h the effort to improve people's health all around the world by being selfi=
sh and by putting the US pharmaceutical manufacturer and insurance company'=
s profits in priority. The US must not damage the idea of DOHA declaration.=
 The right to people's health and lives belong to people, not to pharmaceut=
ical companies.


5. Medicine policy and health insurance system are not subjects of trading =
negotiation.
Medicine policy and health insurance system are respective country's sovere=
ignty, not subjects of trade. Previous agreements or progressing negotiatio=
ns show well about what the US wants. The US demands stronger protection of=
 patent than that of TRIPs or the US law. However, that's not all. The US i=
s trying to demolish anything that might be an obstacle that gets in their =
way of generating profits by including health care issue which is strongly =
related to people's lives.
In the process of reaching an agreement of the US-Australia FTA, Bush admin=
istration demanded the destruction of Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme of Aus=
tralia. An Australian patient said "we're going to get the money from old, =
sick, and poor Australians and give them to American pharmaceutical compani=
es, CEOs and stockholders. Those that are poor in Australia won't be able t=
o afford medicine just like the ones in America."  We will decide ourselves=
 about the medicine policy and health insurance system for Korean patients.=
 We strongly insist to exclude these terms from the negotiation just like w=
hen they were excluded in the Canadian-US free trading pact.


6. American style medical service will demolish public health system of Sou=
th Korea.
The US requested Korea to apply American rules in investment in the notific=
ation of Korea-US FTA negotiation. The US also strongly urged Korean govern=
ment to permit private health insurance through AMCHAM. Demanding the prote=
ction of investment by American standard will become concrete to allow priv=
ate corporation and private health insurance will be embodied to private he=
alth insurance of the US.
This will make the hospital corporations and hospitals will no longer put t=
heir priority in caring for patients but instead they will try their best t=
o earn money. Also the American style private insurance policy will destruc=
t the national public health care system of Korea. South American countries=
 that have imported and applied the US style of medical service in search f=
or the foreign investment had faced low level of national health, severe co=
mplains about inequality in health and inefficiency without exception.  WHO=
 recently evaluated and ranked Chile's medical system at 169 out of 191 cou=
ntries.  In case of Mexico, those who are not working are uninsured, and th=
ere aren't enough facilities for them to be taken care of. On the other han=
d, US private insurance companies are generating a lot of profit from it. W=
e strongly argue that Korean medical system must be more publicized. Theref=
ore, Korea-US FTA which will bring the business industrialization in the me=
dical field, m!
 ust not be signed.


7. US must stop the pressuring Korea to import Beef that might be infected =
with mad cow disease.
The US forced Korea to import American beef as one of the terms in pre-nego=
tiation of Korea-US FTA. We want to make it clear that we do not want to im=
port Amercian beef.  No one should be exposed to the danger of eating beef =
that has the possibility of causing Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease. Many countri=
es in Europe prohibit animal feed to their livestock and WHO is also sugges=
ting the same. However, the US is permitting animals other than ruminants t=
o eat animal feed. And the US is not prohibitting every type of animal feed=
 to cow. As long as this problem continues, American beef are not free from=
 the infection of mad cow disease. This fact is well proven by the discover=
ies of cows that are infected in the state of Texas, Washington, and also i=
n Alabama.
Nevertheless, at the USTR hearing which was held on March 14th, Ranchers-Ca=
ttlemen Action Legal Fund complained about the fact that Korean government =
decided to reopen imports of boneless beef from cattle aged up to 30 months=
 but left the door closed for bone-in beef on January, and they claimed tha=
t the first FTA negotiation shouldn't be held unless Korean government deci=
des to import whole beef including bone-in beef.
Their inspection system is also a problem. Infected beef was found in Japan=
 and it was revealed that the company which exported was from New York. Ano=
ther problem was found in Hong Kong recently and the exporting company was =
from Colorado.  According to the report about the inspection of mad cow dis=
ease in the US which was announced in Feb. 1st, 2006, the management of con=
trolling the hazards was inappropriate, there were one out of every six com=
panies that processed the meat even though the cows were suspicious of bein=
g infected, and it also revealed that only 5~10% of the visual inspection w=
as done. According to the report from Government Accountability Office in F=
eb. 25th, 2005, 2,800 out of the total of 14,800 stock farms were never eve=
n audited for the imperfect stock feed regulations. We are strongly against=
 the Korea-US FTA which will sell out the public national health of Korea f=
or the rapacity of American government.


We're so well aware of the fact that there has been no country that improve=
d their people's health, economy, or the quality of the lives of their nati=
on among the ones that agreed to sign FTA with the US. Instead for those co=
untries that signed FTA with the US experienced the downfall of economy, fo=
rced to lean on the US, the right for people to their health was demolished=
 and poverty was increased.  We know that this is what the US wants. Theref=
ore, we oppose Korea-US FTA agreement.

March 24th, 2006

Endorsement

[Korean NGOs]
Christian Medical Association for People Health
Health Right Network
Intellectual Property Left 'IPLeft'
Korean Progressive Network Jinbonet
Korea Social Insurance trade Union
Korean Peasants League
Korean Advenced Farmers Federation
Korean Federation of Medical Groups for Health Rights:
(Association of Physicians for Humanism,
Association of Korea Doctors for Health Rights,
Korea Dentists Association for Health Society,
Korea Health and Medical Workers Union,
Korean Pharmacists For Democratic Society,
Solidarity for Worker's Health)
Nanuri+,HIV/AIDS Human Rights Advocacy Group of Korea
Public Pharmaceutical Center

[US NGOs]