[Ip-health] IPS: Governments (Still) Pondering How to Make Drugs Accessible

[Sarah Rimmington]

*Governments (Still) Pondering How to Make Drugs Accessible*
Inter Press Service (Johannesburg)
NEWS
30 October 2007
http://allafrica.com/stories/200710301089.html

By David Cronin
Brussels

The struggle to make medicines affordable to the world's poor,
especially in Africa, is raging on at the highest levels. Last week the
European Commission took a landmark decision on generic drugs and next
week a high-level intergovernmental meeting will look at ways to prevent
patents from blocking access to drugs.

In an agreement announced last week (on October 23), European Union (EU)
governments were told that they are free to make available generic
versions of patented drugs for export to poor countries which lack their
own manufacturing facilities.

And next week, between November 5 and 10, a little-known group -- the
intergovernmental working group (IGWG) on public health, innovation and
intellectual property rights -- will meet in Geneva, Switzerland, to
work on a plan of action.

This follows a 2006 World Health Organisation (WHO) report which found
that unless there is greater clarity about some of the surrounding
issues, patents will still be invoked by drug firms in a way that
continues to deprive the poor of potentially life-saving medicines.

The humanitarian group M=E9decins Sans Fronti=E8res (Doctors Without Border=
s
or MSF) is urging EU representatives to play an active role in framing
this blueprint.

In last week's decision, the EU's executive, the European Commission,
has undertaken not to hinder any of its 27 member states if they should
decide to produce generic drugs as cheaper alternatives to patented
drugs. The latter are normally too expensive for the vast majority of
people in poor countries.

The accord was reached between members of the European Parliament (MEPs)
and representatives of EU governments and the Commission. It will allow
the Union ratify a World Trade Organisation (WTO) decision officially
designed to increase the supply of medicines to poor countries.

The decision will give permanent effect to a 2003 waiver from the WTO's
Trade Related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement. The waiver
was designed to allow poor countries which lack production capacity to
address public health emergencies by importing cheap generic versions of
patented drugs produced under a compulsory licence.

The EU decision was originally made in December 2005 but MEPs had
declined to approve it until they won concessions from the other main EU
bodies.

As part of the agreement, the Commission has also undertaken not to
insert any intellectual property provisions specifically related to
pharmaceuticals in the free trade deals known as economic partnership
agreements (EPAs) which are currently being negotiated with the almost
80 African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries.

Yet, while campaigners for access to medicines have applauded the deal,
they point out that other measures must ensue if the severe shortage of
essential drugs in Africa is to be reduced.

The United Nations has estimated that 25.8 million people were HIV
positive in sub-Saharan Africa in 2005. In Tanzania, Ethiopia, Ghana,
Lesotho, Mozambique, Nigeria, Tanzania and Zimbabwe, 90 percent of those
who needed the anti-retroviral drugs (ARVs) to treat AIDS could not
obtain them.

Price is a major factor behind lack of access. Generic competition has
helped to lower the price of a yearly supply of ARVs to 99 dollars per
person -- down from 15,000 dollars six years ago. Yet the "second-line
treatments" needed by people who have developed resistance to their
previous prescription are often several times more expensive than the
older drugs in Africa.

"We won this battle, proving that it is crucial for the European
Parliament to be united," said Italian Liberal Gianluca Susta, one of
the MEPs who negotiated the deal.

"However, the real struggle for access to medicines against HIV/AIDS is
still not over. Bureaucracy and reluctance from developed countries are
often a major impediment. I am sure there will be other occasions when
we have to return to this and reaffirm our stance," said Susta.

Despite the assurances given by the European Commission that it will not
insert provisions inimical to public health in the EPAs, concerns remain
about other clauses related to intellectual property which are contained
in draft EPAs prepared by EU officials.

Many African countries are not currently focused on intellectual
property in the EPA talks, given that the Commission has revised a plan
to have comprehensive deals finalised by the end of this year. On
October 22, the Commission signalled that EPAs signed during 2007 will
instead be mainly limited to trade in goods, leaving discussion on other
issues to a later date.

Still, analysts have questioned why some of the intellectual property
clauses suggested by the Commission for the EPAs are almost identical to
provisions in EU law. Some argue that applying stringent rules in this
area will not be conducive to industrial development in Africa.

"It's really not necessary to include IP (intellectual property)
provisions," said Fleur Claessens from the non-governmental organisation
the International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development in
Geneva. "We would like to keep them out of the EPA debate."

But an African diplomat involved in the negotiations said he believed
that better copyright rules than those now applying are necessary.
"Nobody wants to flout intellectual property rules outright," said the
diplomat, speaking on condition of anonymity.

"If an inventor comes up with a telephone and sees a photocopy of it the
following day, that's not good. The kind of intellectual property rights
you have in Europe will not be good for us. What will be good for us is
something we decide ourselves," the diplomat said.

Commenting on the two developments, MSF campaigner Alexandra Heumber
told IPS that "from a political point of view, it's really good that the
European Parliament has accepted the deal. It shows that MEPs have been
very committed to access to medicines.

"On the other hand, the EU needs to change the system because we see
that the patent system is insufficient in providing medicines to
developing countries. The EU must adopt a pro-public health policy in
the IGWG," Heumber said.

MSF is pushing for an international fund to finance research and
development on neglected diseases. Just 1 percent of the nearly 1,400
new medicines approved between 1975 and 1999 were for treating tropical
ailments and tuberculosis, despite these diseases comprising 10 percent
of the world's "disease burden".

Another idea being discussed is that of "pooling" patents, whereby drug
firms would agree to combine their patents and license them to one
another or to third parties. Such an approach to intellectual property
is already common in the technology field, for example where common
standards are required for DVDs or for audio and video files on the
internet.

The WHO is exploring whether it could host an international patent pool
system under which agreements would be negotiated between pharmaceutical
firms and governments in poor countries.

--
Sarah Rimmington
Attorney
Essential Action, Access to Medicines Project
Washington, DC
Tel: (202) 387-8030
Cell: (202) 422-2687
www.essentialaction.org/access/