[Ip-health] WHO Members Near Accord On Global Strategy On IP And Health

[James Love]

Sarah,

I'll offer a few comments regarding to transparency.

Holding briefings with groups is helpful and welcome.  Answering
specific questions about positions is also important, and often more
useful than a one-off briefing in a 5 day negotiation.  Being candid on
pro-industry positions is also more transparent, than endless hair
splitting double talk and misleading excuses for not backing consumer
interests.

  Jamie

On S, 2008-05-24 at 13:05 +0200, Sarah Rimmington wrote:
> Re Canada, they were very open with me and briefed me on their position
> on global patent databases and use of competitive policies to prevent
> and/or remedy anti-competitive practices when I asked them about this
> prior to the negotiations reaching those issues.  There were some
> differences in what Essential Action wanted to see on global patent
> databases and the position espoused by Canada.  We agreed with their
> position on anti-competitive practices as stated - they said they
> supported language going in encouraging adoption in national legislation
> etc. these types of laws to prevent and promote anti-competitive
> practices re medical patents.  They also were open about what their
> intended negotiating strategy would be, though I can't confirm whether
> or not they lived up to that as I wasn't in the room.  Thus, I don't
> know if they were a constructive force in the negotiations and actively
> seeking consensus, etc.  This would be interesting to know as
> negotiations were very slow and tough and I would hope Canada was
> playing a helpful role etc.
>
> I was unable to locate them casually to find out during the IWG
> negotiations what was actually happening, but I wouldn't say they were
> not open with me when I asked.  I did not put in a formal request for
> another briefing on IGWG during the course of the negotiations.
>
> However, this morning I ran into a member of the delegation and she told
> me very openly when I asked about the plan of action talks that Canada
> opposed WHO being a lead stakeholder with respect to some key elements
> in the plan of action that I believe remain in brackets right now.  In
> particular, Canada does not support WHO being lead stakeholder re giving
> advice and assistance re TRIPS flexibilities in element 5.  At the time,
> discussions on that issue were ongoing.  Canada did at that time support
> WHO being a stakeholder, but not taking the lead, because they do not
> have the capacity right now.  I indicated I did not agree with this
> view... that WHO should be lead stakeholder.
>
> The US delegation, on the other hand, have so far not agreed to meet
> with civil society.  When I asked for a briefing yesterday morning I was
> told no by 3 separate delegation members.  At lunch time i asked another
> delegate if civil society could be briefed by them anytime between then
> and before the negotiations are done today, I was told they'd look into
> it and get back to me.  I have still not heard back.  I will email and
> follow up on that now.
>
> Sarah Rimmington
>
>
> James Love wrote:
> > On Sat, 2008-05-24 at 09:29 +0200, Judit Rius Sanjuan wrote:
> >
> >> Intellectual Property Watch
> >> 24 May 2008
> >> WHO Members Near Accord On Global Strategy On IP And Health
> >>
> >
> >
> >> Developed countries such as the United States, European Union and
> >> Canada have been criticised by some civil society members for
> >> seemingly opposing human rights and public health principles within
> >> the negotiation while not informing their stakeholders of the
> >> approach. Officials from those countries could not be reached for
> >> comment.
> >>
> >>
> >
> > I agree with this last paragraph, and offer also a somewhat different
> > framing of the issue.  The US government, particularly under the Bush
> > Administration is often more transparent in its advocacy of
> > pharmaceutical industry positions, and we often can approach the US
> > delegation, and find out roughly what the US is saying in the
> > negotiations.  What is sometimes more difficult to establish are the
> > positions taken by Canada, the member states of the European Union, or
> > some other developed countries.  For the first 4 days of this round, th=
e
> > negotiators from the European Member states were particularly closed to
> > discussions with public health groups, and were secretive about EU
> > positions, many of which closely echoed those advocated in a more
> > transparent manner by the Bush Administration.
> >
> > The secrecy regarding the positions is normally designed to conceal fro=
m
> > the public the anti-health and anti-consumer positions that high income
> > countries have embraced this week.  Certainly the negotiators themselve=
s
> > know what is being said behind closed doors, and the pharmaceutical
> > industry is extremely well briefed by the US, the European Union and th=
e
> > Swiss delegations.  The public, on the other hand, is often not well
> > informed, as to the specific actions taken by their own country (or EU)
> > negotiators.
> >
> > That said, the outcome of the negotiation this week was good, and in th=
e
> > end, the high income countries showed enough flexibility to move things
> > forward in a concrete and powerful way.
> >
> >   Jamie
> >
> > --
> > James Love, Knowledge Ecology International
> > mailto:james.love@keionline.org
> > voice +1.202.332.2670, fax +1.202.332.2673, US mobile +1.202.361.3040,
> > Geneva mobile +41.76.413.6584
> > "When everyone thinks alike, no one thinks very much." =E2=80=94 Walter=
 Lippmann
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Ip-health mailing list
> > Ip-health@lists.essential.org
> > http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health
> >
> >
> >
>
> --
> Sarah Rimmington
> Attorney
> Essential Action, Access to Medicines Project
> Washington, DC
> Tel: (202) 387-8030
> Cell: (202) 422-2687
> www.essentialaction.org/access/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ip-health mailing list
> Ip-health@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health
>