[Ip-health] Opposition Gains Support Against Novartis Patent Lawsuit In India

[Alexandra HEUMBER]

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
15/2/2007=0D
Opposition Gains Support Against Novartis Patent Lawsuit In India=0D
By Tove Iren S. Gerhardsen=0D
As a case challenging India=E2=80=99s patent law proceeds this week, pressu=
re is=0D
building from politicians, religious leaders and civil society on Swiss=0D
pharmaceutical company Novartis to withdraw the case in the name of public=
=0D
health, sources said.=0D
In January 2006, Novartis was denied a patent in India for a special kind=
=0D
of cancer drug, which the company has patented in nearly 40 countries,=0D
including China, a company spokesperson told Intellectual Property Watch=0D
recently. As a result, it took the Indian government to court arguing that=
=0D
Indian law is not compliant with international trade law, sources said.=0D
A hearing in the India case began on 15 February, and was scheduled to=0D
continue on 16 February, sources said. A participant at the hearing posted=
=0D
a comment to the Knowledge Ecology International Ip-health listserv=0D
stating that Novartis laid out the non-compliance argument.=0D
The Novartis spokesperson said India signed up to the World Trade=0D
Organization Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property=0D
Rights (TRIPS) in 1995, and implemented it with its 2005 Patent Act. He=0D
also argued that without intellectual property, one will not get=0D
investments for new medicines, adding that the pharmaceutical industry in=
=0D
general supports Novartis=E2=80=99s action.=0D
But in the run-up to this, the pressure on Novartis was building, with=0D
church leaders such as South Africa Archbishop Desmond Tutu expressing=0D
their concerns, according to a press release from the Ecumenical Advocacy=
=0D
Alliance.=0D
In the United States Congress, Representative Henry Waxman, Democrat from=
=0D
California, sent a letter to the Novartis CEO Daniel Vasella, according to=
=0D
Oxfam America. Waxman wrote: =E2=80=9CI do not dispute your right to apply =
for a=0D
patent or appeal a denial. I am concerned, however, that your attempt to=0D
influence domestic Indian law could have a severe impact on worldwide=0D
access to medicines.=E2=80=9D He ends the 13 February letter by urging Vase=
lla,=0D
=E2=80=9Cto reconsider your position in this case.=E2=80=9D=0D
In Europe, five Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) representing=0D
four parties have issued a =E2=80=9Cdeclaration=E2=80=9D asking Novartis to=
 drop the case=0D
and the European Commission and Council to take a position on it, a=0D
M=C3=A9dicins Sans Fronti=C3=A8res (MSF) spokesperson told Intellectual Pro=
perty=0D
Watch. The declaration (which is only available in French) will be open to=
=0D
signatures among MEPs next week and could become a resolution if the=0D
majority of MEPs sign it, the spokesperson said.=0D
The MEPs are: Caroline Lucas (UK-Green Party), Kader Arif (France-Party of=
=0D
European Socialists, PSE), Pierre Schapira (France-PSE), Luisa Morgantini=
=0D
(Italy-European United Left, GUE) and Johan Van Hecke (Belgium-Alliance of=
=0D
Liberals and Democrats, ALDE).=0D
In addition, another set of MEPs sent a letter Vasella, dated 9 February,=
=0D
expressing their =E2=80=9Cgrave concerns=E2=80=9D and asking him to withdra=
w the case. =E2=80=9CWe=0D
acknowledge the importance of patent rights,=E2=80=9D they said. =E2=80=9CH=
owever, they=0D
must not go against the interest of millions of people who desperately=0D
need access to cheaper drugs.=E2=80=9D=0D
These MEPs also wrote to the president of the European Parliament,=0D
Hans-Gert P=C3=B6ttering, as well as the heads of the parliamentary committ=
ees=0D
for international trade (INTA), environment, public health and food safety=
=0D
(ENVI), and development (DEVE), requesting that they discuss the case, the=
=0D
spokesperson said. The MEPs involved are: Lucas, Anne Ferreira (France,=0D
PSE), Dorette Corbey (the Netherlands, Social Democratic Party, PvdA), Max=
=0D
van den Berg (the Netherlands, PvdA) and Carl Schlyter (Sweden, Green=0D
Party).=0D
An assistant to Lucas told Intellectual Property Watch that INTA has=0D
agreed to organise a hearing on this, but as of yet, no date has been set.=
=0D
=0D
At a meeting of INTA on 26 January, following the hearing, European Trade=
=0D
Commissioner Peter Mandelson was asked about the EU=E2=80=99s position on t=
he=0D
Novartis case, a source said. Mandelson replied that the EU is following=0D
the issue very closely and will take a position when it will be necessary,=
=0D
the source said. This was confirmed by Mandelson=E2=80=99s spokesperson.=0D
In the letters, these MEPs refer to the EU resolution on =E2=80=9CThe EU-In=
dia=0D
relations: A strategic partnership=E2=80=9D (2004/2169), which was adopted =
on 29=0D
September 2005. =E2=80=9CThrough this resolution the EP stressed the crucia=
l role=0D
of India concerning access to medicines for all and the need to ensure=0D
that India will implement its IP law in a manner that avoid[sic] barriers=
=0D
to the production, marketing and export of essential medicines for the=0D
developing world,=E2=80=9D they wrote.=0D
=E2=80=9CIf Novartis wins its case, a lot of patients in developing countri=
es, in=0D
particular those suffering from HIV/AIDS, who mainly rely on affordable=0D
drugs from India, would not have access anymore to drugs,=E2=80=9D the lett=
er=0D
says, stating that it is =E2=80=9Ccompletely unacceptable=E2=80=9D that com=
mercial=0D
interests of a company should =E2=80=9Ccome before the general interests an=
d the=0D
right of states to protect and promote public health and access to=0D
medicines.=E2=80=9D=0D
The Novartis spokesperson told Intellectual Property Watch that this is=0D
not a case about access to medicines as the cancer drug, Gleevec (imatinib=
=0D
mesylate), is used in 1-2 people per 100,000, but the case is about=0D
intellectual property, and about gaining =E2=80=9Cclarity about intellectua=
l=0D
property rights in India.=E2=80=9D=0D
Many nongovernmental organisations (NGO) disagree, and MSF, leader of the=
=0D
campaign, is one of them. It is pressuring Novartis to drop the case and=0D
through a campaign it has collected some 290,000 signatures. =E2=80=9COver =
89=0D
percent of the medicines we use to treat AIDS come from India. We cannot=0D
stand by and let Novartis turn off the tap,=E2=80=9D MSF said.=0D
On 23 January, MSF and Oxfam took part in a public hearing on =E2=80=9Cpati=
ents=0D
before patents=E2=80=9D and the =E2=80=9CNovartis case against the Indian l=
aw on patents,=E2=80=9D=0D
organised by MEPs. Representatives from NGOs as well as Novartis attended,=
=0D
they said.=0D
Separately, German Minister of Economic Cooperation and Development,=0D
Heidemarie Wieczorek-Zeul, has also asked Novartis to drop the case,=0D
according to the German Frankfurter Rundschau newspaper on 19 January=0D
2007. She said Novartis should do this to save lives, according to the=0D
article.=0D
Novartis=E2=80=99 View=0D
A hearing in the case was scheduled for 26 January but was very brief and=
=0D
the next court date was 15 February, the Novartis spokesperson said. The=0D
status of a report of an expert commission, called the Mashelkar=0D
Commission, which states that the position of the government is not=0D
compliant with TRIPS was discussed at the hearing, the spokesperson said.=
=0D
A number of NGOs have taken issue with this report.=0D
=E2=80=9CThe Mashelkar Report reaches conclusions that are neither justifie=
d nor=0D
accurate,=E2=80=9D asserted Achal Prabhala, an IP researcher from Bangalore=
,=0D
India. =E2=80=9CIts twisted logic is apparently in =E2=80=98national intere=
st=E2=80=99,=E2=80=9D he said.=0D
The Novartis spokesperson emphasised on 15 February that the case is not=0D
about access to medicines but rather the discussions among all=0D
stakeholders should focus on understanding the importance of intellectual=
=0D
property rights.=0D
The company spokesperson said that the Indian middle class of some 50=0D
million people is growing (seven times the population of Switzerland) and=
=0D
these people can afford patented goods, but there are also people of=0D
extreme poverty in India. He maintained, however, that generics is not the=
=0D
solution as their average price for a one-year supply can be four to five=
=0D
times the earnings of some.=0D
For further details about the case, visit www.ip-watch.org (Public Health,=
=0D
19 October 2006).=0D
Tove Gerhardsen may be reached at tgerhardsen@ip-watch.ch.=0D
=0D
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License. All of the news=0D
articles and features on Intellectual Property Watch are also subject to a=
=0D
Creative Commons License which makes them available for widescale, free,=0D
non-commercial reproduction and translation.=0D
You can subscribe for automatic notifications of these stories, via the=0D
RSS feed or via the e-mail alerts. Subscribers can choose the frequency of=
=0D
notifications as well as particular topics of greatest interest to them.=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
=0D
###################################=0D
SIGN MSF'S 'DROP THE CASE' PETITION=0D
=0D
Millions of people around the world today rely on affordable medicines=0D
produced in India.  Pharmaceutical company Novartis is taking the Indian=0D
government to court to force a change in the country's patent law.  If=0D
Novartis wins, a major source of affordable medicines for millions of=0D
people across the globe could dry up.=0D
=0D
MSF is urging Novartis to DROP THE CASE.=0D
=0D
Find out more and sign up to our petition:=0D
http://www.msf.org/petition_india/international.html=0D
####################################=0D
=0D
=0D
Alexandra Heumber=0D
EU Advocacy Liaison Officer=0D
M=C3=A9decins Sans Fronti=C3=A8res=0D
Access to Essential Medicines Campaign=0D
Rue Dupr=C3=A9, 94. 1090 Brussels=0D
++32 (0) 2 474 75 09 (Dir off)=0D
++ 32 (0) 479 514 900 (Mob)=0D
++ 32 (0) 2 474 75 75 (Fax)=0D
=0D
--
[ Content of type image/gif deleted ]
--
[ Content of type image/gif deleted ]