[Ip-health] IP-Watch: UN Special Rapporteur: IP In Health Helping Those With Most Means, Less Need

[Miles Teg]

It is amazing that the rich countries can actually peddle this kind of
rubbish without any concerns as to what they sign! But lets not be
surprised  as the financial crisis is showing how bankrupt the values
espoused by the rich countries are... Arguing for compliance and
inherent balance in the TRIPs agreement is weakening the TRIPs
agreement... incredible! They say this in public as if Grover is an
idiot without any expertise...

Who needs doublespeak if you are two faced? One rule for the locals and
another for developing countries!

The rich countries are undermining the TRIPs agreement by taking
measures to go TRIPs-plus and secure their monopoly capitalism
super-normal profits.

It is now up to the HRC to issue a resolution that developing countries
should have legislation incorporating TRIPs flexibilities. As a human
rights body, perhaps it should subpoena WIPO to interrogate its
technical assistance (given openly and cofidentially) to countries that
have legislation that exceeds TRIPs obligations.

If WIPO has been pushing such TRIPs plus legislation under cover of
confidentiality then perhaps WIPO DG Gurry has a greater problem in
safeguarding the balance in the IP system. The progressive librarians
have pointed out, for instance in copyright that WIPO technical
assistance guidelines did not adequately respect flexibilities... anyone
know about WIPO assistance on patents that falls short of WHAT IS SIGNED
AND AGREED and is a legal obligation (what the law says as opposed to
self-interested rich country reading) and not the promiscuous
monopoly-capitalist-clinet-states' interpretation?

What procedures would be good to kick start this at the Human Rights
Council?

And perhaps the Obama admin should understand that unless it has broad
support for health reform like from the HRC, its efforts will not meet
the needs of the uninsured or under-insured. But hey, these people
should get jobs and work harder - after all they themselves must be
responsible for their poverty right?


Thiru Balasubramaniam wrote:
>
> http://www.ip-watch.org/weblog/2009/06/16/un-special-rapporteur-ip-in-hea=
lth-helping-those-with-most-means-less-need/
>
>
> <SNIP>
>
> States Respond to Report
>
> The report received a mixed reception at the HRC, with the United
> States and Switzerland in particular saying that Grover=92s report was
> attempting to weaken the TRIPS agreement, according to a press release
> summarising the council=92s discussions.
>
> Achamkulangare Gopinathan of India said that TRIPS does not undermine
> the rights of governments to take measures to protect public health,
> and that the 2001 Doha Declaration on Public Health affirmed that
> view, according to the press release. Norway, Australia and others
> agreed that TRIPS flexibilities could be used to aid public health
> goals, and Grover said his report did not extend beyond encouraging
> the use of these flexibilities.
>
> Jurg Lauber of Switzerland said that Grover=92s report indicated the
> lack of market incentives was the main issue in explaining why
> research and development for neglected diseases is also insufficient,
> and needs be further explored, according to the release.
>
> But =93the protection of public health must prevail over private
> interests,=94 said Jean Feyder of Luxembourg. And Joelle Hivonnet of the
> European Commission said there are =93growing difficulties=94 in getting
> medications under patent produced in generic form, and asked if Grover
> would look into the possibility of patent pools, in which rights
> owners agree to licence intellectual property relating to certain
> technologies as a collective, rather than as individual patents.
>
>
> -------
>
>
> 16 June 2009
> UN Special Rapporteur: IP In Health Helping Those With Most Means,
> Less Need
> By Kaitlin Mara @ 12:47 pm
>
> Nearly two billion people lack access to the medical care they need,
> and in the developing world those who do manage to have access are
> overwhelmingly paying out-of-pocket, often triggering a fall into
> poverty. The monopoly-making power of patents to drive the cost of
> medicines beyond affordability is a significant contributor to this
> disturbing trend, says a report of the United Nations rapporteur on
> the right to health presented at last week=92s Human Rights Council.
>
> The ultimate goal of developed countries =93was and is the universal
> harmonisation of IP laws according to their standards,=94 the report
> asserts. They have tried to push such harmonisation through the World
> Trade Organization Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property
> Rights (TRIPS) agreement as well as through free trade agreements.
> While flexibilities in TRIPS exist, developing nations often lack the
> capacity to or are the subject of political pressure not to use them.
>
> =93From a right to health perspective,=94 it adds, =93developing countrie=
s
> and LDCs=94 need to use flexibilities that remain in the TRIPS
> agreement, in particular to create exceptions to patent rights, issue
> compulsory licences, and facilitate parallel importation.
>
> Developing countries need to be particularly careful when negotiating
> free trade agreements on a bilateral or regional basis, the report
> says. Such agreements =93have extensive implications for pharmaceutical
> patent protection=94 and =93are usually negotiated with little
> transparency or participation from the public, and often establish
> TRIPS-plus provisions [that] undermine the safeguards and
> flexibilities that developing countries sought to preserve under TRIPS.=
=94
>
> TRIPS-plus measures include extension of patentability terms, the
> introduction of exclusivity of use on data gleaned from clinical
> trials, the linking of a patent status with a drug registration and
> approval (so generic versions of drugs under patent cannot be approved
> for market), and the creation of new enforcement mechanisms.
>
> These free trade agreements can =93severely impede access to medicines,=
=94
> said report author special rapporteur Anand Grover, when he presented
> [pdf] at the Human Rights Council on 2-3 June. The Human Rights
> Council is meeting from 2 =96 18 June; the report is available here [pdf]=
.
>
> The special rapporteur on the right to health is mandated [pdf] to
> submit an annual report to the Human Rights Council detailing
> information about, and recommendations for improving, the realisation
> of the right to the highest possible standards of physical and mental
> health.
>
> Grover expressed the hope, according to a summary of the 2-3 June
> event, that the Human Rights Council would address these intellectual
> property issues in the form of a resolution.
>
> But it is unclear that they will do so. A member of the HRC
> secretariat told Intellectual Property Watch that it is now up to the
> member states to decide what to do with the report.
>
> The report recommends that developing countries introduce national
> laws incorporating TRIPS flexibilities, including procedures for
> issuing compulsory licences. Full use of a grace period in adopting
> all aspects of the TRIPS agreement afforded to least developed
> countries should be encouraged, and TRIPS-plus standards should not be
> introduced, it adds. And developing countries should seek - and
> receive - technical assistance from international agencies to help
> build their capacity in implementing TRIPS flexibilities, it concluded.
>
> Anand Grover was appointed special rapporteur on the right of everyone
> to the enjoyment of the highest attainable standard of physical and
> mental health in the summer of 2008. As an attorney in India, he
> directs the HIV/AIDS unit of the Lawyers Collective, a human rights
> and public interest law firm. His full bio is available here.
>
> States Respond to Report
>
> The report received a mixed reception at the HRC, with the United
> States and Switzerland in particular saying that Grover=92s report was
> attempting to weaken the TRIPS agreement, according to a press release
> summarising the council=92s discussions.
>
> Achamkulangare Gopinathan of India said that TRIPS does not undermine
> the rights of governments to take measures to protect public health,
> and that the 2001 Doha Declaration on Public Health affirmed that
> view, according to the press release.
> Norway, Australia and others agreed that TRIPS flexibilities could be
> used to aid public health goals, and Grover said his report did not
> extend beyond encouraging the use of these flexibilities.
>
> Jurg Lauber of Switzerland said that Grover=92s report indicated the
> lack of market incentives was the main issue in explaining why
> research and development for neglected diseases is also insufficient,
> and needs be further explored, according to the release.
>
> But =93the protection of public health must prevail over private
> interests,=94 said Jean Feyder of Luxembourg. And Joelle Hivonnet of the
> European Commission said there are =93growing difficulties=94 in getting
> medications under patent produced in generic form, and asked if Grover
> would look into the possibility of patent pools, in which rights
> owners agree to licence intellectual property relating to certain
> technologies as a collective, rather than as individual patents.
>
> According to the summary, Victoria Romero of Mexico added that in the
> case of pandemics, such as the recent outbreak of H1N1 or swine flu,
> responses should take into account the =93full respect of human rights
> and fundamental freedoms.=94
>
> And Muhammed Saeed Sarwar of Pakistan suggested technology transfer
> should be encouraged in order to help developing countries improve
> their capacity to manufacture medicines.
>
> Access to and innovation of medicine is more complex than just IP
> rights, said Imad Zuhairi of Palestine, despite the fact that IP is an
> important incentive for innovation. Situations of poverty and
> occupation, such as exist in Gaza, may prevent access to health care
> no matter the IP regulation, added Sarwar, asking how the free flow of
> technology could be accomplished =93for people whose movements were
> restricted.=94
>
> The Role of Pharmaceutical Companies
>
> Others said that non-state actors, especially international
> pharmaceutical companies, have a key role in access to medicines that
> needed further consideration.
>
> Pharmaceutical companies as well as states have a duty to respect the
> human right to health, said Grover. As a part of his role he visited
> the offices of brand drug producer GlaxoSmithKline in London, and
> found that they had made strides in aiding the goal of access to
> medicines by reducing the prices of their drugs in least developed
> countries and via patent pooling. Some still remain unaffordable,
> however, and the company had previously, for example, sued South
> Africa in an attempt to stop a law intended to make use of TRIPS
> flexibilities to create generic competition on drugs for HIV/AIDS.
> Grover encouraged GSK to publicly commit not to push for TRIPS-plus
> regulation.
>
> Kaitlin Mara may be reached at kmara@ip-watch.ch.
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> Thiru Balasubramaniam
> Geneva Representative
> Knowledge Ecology International (KEI)
> thiru@keionline.org
>
>
> Tel: +41 22 791 6727
> Mobile: +41 76 508 0997
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Ip-health mailing list
> Ip-health@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health
>