[Ip-health] IP-Watch: European Parliament Set To Reprimand Mandelso

[Thiru Balasubramaniam]

http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/wp-trackback.php?p=3D1032

Intellectual Property Watch

9 May 2008
European Parliament Set To Reprimand Mandelson For Pressuring Thailand


By David Cronin for Intellectual Property Watch
BRUSSELS - The European Parliament looks set to take Brussels=92 top
trade official to task over his latest attempt to persuade Thailand
that it should revise its policy on pharmaceutical patents.

Shortly after a new government was installed in Bangkok earlier this
year, European Union trade commissioner Peter Mandelson urged it to
review a series of compulsory licenses issued by the previous
administration that overruled patents on several medicines.

When a copy of Mandelson=92s letter, dated 21 February [see attached],
was obtained by members of the European Parliament (MEPs) in the past
few weeks, it drew an angry response. Some MEPs have accused the
European Commission of backtracking on commitments it has made to
support the use of such measures as compulsory licensing in order to
reduce the price of medicines in developing countries.

In discussions held this week, representatives of the Parliament=92s
political groups agreed to formally protest at Mandelson=92s letter.
They also decided to request that Mandelson appears before the
Parliament=92s international trade committee in the near future to
answer questions about the surrounding issues.

Vittorio Agnoletto, an Italian MEP who has been actively involved in
the access to medicines debate, said: =93We absolutely cannot accept
this.=94

Agnoletto alleged that there is a contradiction between statements
that Mandelson has made to the Parliament and those contained in his
letter. =93He is using two different languages,=94 Agnoletto added. =93I
have the impression he is working more for the pharmaceutical industry
than for the Commission.=94

In his letter - addressed to Thai Commerce Minister Mingkwan
Saengsuwan, Mandelson said that the European Union is =93one of
the most important sources of foreign direct investment in Thailand.=94
Bangkok=92s stance on compulsory licensing, he continued, =93has raised
some concern among EU investors, particularly the pharmaceutical
industry.=94 Industry has frequently raised the concern that uncertainty
about patent protection for companies=92 products is a deterrent to
investment.

Mandelson said that he supported a declaration approved by the World
Trade Organization at its 2001 ministerial conference in Doha, Qatar.
That declaration reinforced WTO rules that allow a flexible approach
to be taken to intellectual property rights when issues of public
health are at stake.

Still, he argued that compulsory licensing should be =93an exceptional
measure=94 and that alternatives such as negotiations with drugs
companies should be explored before it is resorted to. =93Against this
background, I was rather surprised to learn that the outgoing minister
for public health has reportedly announced a new set of compulsory
licenses for new drugs before his departure,=94 he said.

This is the second time that Mandelson is known to have queried the
Thai policy on pharmaceutical patents. During 2007, he wrote a similar
letter to several Thai ministers after Bangkok decided to issue
compulsory licenses for three medicines used to treat HIV/AIDS and one
for heart disease.

After being questioned by MEPs, Mandelson offered assurances in
October last year that he would not do anything to undermine access to
medicines in what he described as =93poor developing countries.=94
Thailand is, however, recognised as a middle-income country by the
United Nations.

Alexandra Heumber, a campaigner with the humanitarian aid agency
M=E9decins Sans Fronti=E8res (Doctors Without Borders) welcomed the MEPs=92
decision to complain over the alleged contradictions in Mandelson=92s
statements.

Each of the EU=92s most powerful institutions - the Commission,
Parliament and Council of Ministers - has undertaken to promote access
to affordable medicines in developing countries, she said. =93It is
important that each of them takes its responsibility seriously,=94 she
added. =93If we don=92t have strong political will to affirm the
commitments made at Doha and to support the flexibilities it provides
for, then they will never be put into practice.=94

According to Heumber, the Doha declaration leaves it at the discretion
of developing countries to decide when they wish to issue compulsory
licenses and that it does not contain any obligation that negotiations
take place with a patent-holder beforehand.

=93Peter Mandelson is trying to reinterpret the Doha declaration,=94 she
said.

David Cronin may be reached at info@ip-watch.ch.

------------------------------------------------------------


Thiru Balasubramaniam
Geneva Representative
Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)
thiru@keionline.org


Tel: +41 22 791 6727
Mobile: +41 76 508 0997