UK–India CETA: Patents and International Intellectual Property Governance
By Pratyush Nath Upreti & Virender Chandel
This policy brief locates the United Kingdom-India Comprehensive and Economic Trade Agreement’s (CETA) intellectual property rights (IPRs) rules in the midst of trade-offs. It succinctly provides an overview of the IPR Chapter, analyses the specific provisions on patents and contextualises IP in the broader context of international IP governance. The analysis of the IPR Chapter shows the parties’ objective to establish meaningful commitments on intellectual property protection and enforcement while preserving regulatory flexibility on development-centric and public health priorities. All in all, the IPR Chapter reflects a compromise between a country with an established, strong IP regime and a country seeking greater policy space and advancing IP norms in areas such as traditional knowledge. As India continues integrating into the global trade architecture through bilateral agreements, the CETA IPR Chapter will serve as a critical test case for whether strategic policy space can be meaningfully preserved within contemporary trade frameworks.
Towards an Operative Pathogen ABS System: Implementing the Equal Footing Requirement of Article 12 of the WHO Pandemic Agreement
By Viviana Munoz Tellez, Nirmalya Syam
Multilateral negotiations on the Pathogen Access and Benefit-Sharing (PABS) system remain deadlocked. As required by Article 12 of the World Health Organization (WHO) Pandemic Agreement, the annex operationalizing the PABS system must place on equal footing the rapid and timely sharing of PABS Materials and Sequence Information with the rapid, timely, fair and equitable sharing of benefits that arise from their sharing and utilization. The Annex cannot impose binding sharing obligations on State Parties while making it optional for users of PABS Materials to opt in to the PABS system voluntarily, without legally binding obligations on benefit sharing arising from the utilization of PABS Materials and Sequence Information. The Annex also cannot create a hybrid system providing alternative routes for access, either “open” or “restricted”. This would be inconsistent with Article 12 of the Pandemic Agreement and with the obligations of parties under the Convention on Biological Diversity and its Nagoya Protocol on Access to Genetic Resources and the Fair and Equitable Sharing of Benefits Arising from their Utilization. The Annex must include a standardized contractual framework binding all actors in the PABS chain, a minimum manufacturer participation threshold before country obligations become active, and ensure benefit-sharing is not confined to pandemic emergencies.
Pending the Moratorium: the Status of Non-Violation and Situation Complaints Under the TRIPS Agreement Following MC14
By Viviana Munoz Tellez, Nirmalya Syam
The 14th WTO Ministerial Conference (MC14), held in Yaoundé, Cameroon, concluded on 30 March 2026 without extending the moratorium on non-violation and situation complaints (NVSCs) under the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement). This policy brief argues that the expiry of the moratorium does not render NVSCs automatically applicable to disputes under the Agreement. The requirement under Article 64.3 for the TRIPS Council to examine the scope and modalities of NVSCs and for the WTO Ministerial Conference to adopt a consensus decision thereon, has not been fulfilled.
Until such a decision is taken, NVSCs remain inapplicable to TRIPS disputes. However, unless the implications of the non-extension are addressed, it may discourage the adoption of measures in the public interest by developing countries and least developed countries (LDCs) which would be fully legitimate under the TRIPS Agreement. Any attempt to suggest that NVSCs are now applicable to the obligations under this Agreement in the interim should be firmly contested. Resolving this issue through continued discussions in the TRIPS Council must be prioritized.
Balancing the Global Copyright System in the Public Interest: An Analysis of the African Group’s Proposed Instrument on Limitations and Exceptions
By Faith O. Majekolagbe
The establishment of an international instrument on copyright limitations and exceptions (L&Es) is essential to achieve an appropriate balance between exclusive rights and the overarching public interest in access to copyrighted works and related subject matter. Current international copyright instruments, including the Marrakesh Treaty to Facilitate Access to Published Works for Persons Who Are Blind, Visually Impaired or Otherwise Print Disabled, fail to adequately address L&Es for education, research, equitable access for persons with disabilities, and the operations of educational, research, and cultural heritage institutions such as libraries, archives, and museums. The proposed instrument on L&Es by the African Group seeks to establish mandatory minimum L&Es to support education, research, and access to information within the international copyright system, thereby promoting global harmonization and ensuring that copyright law supports, not impedes, development objectives and human rights obligations. This policy brief offers a thorough analysis of the proposed instrument, examining its substantive provisions and potential benefits, and proposes some improvements.
WTO arbitration on China’s standard patents policy threatens TRIPS balance and national autonomy
By Nirmalya Syam
This article critically examines the WTO arbitration award in China – Enforcement of Intellectual Property Rights (WT/DS611/ARB25), which marks a significant departure from established interpretations of Article 1.1 of the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). The arbitrators endorsed a broad “anti-frustration” reading of the provision, effectively imposing cross-border obligations on WTO Members and challenging the autonomy of national courts. Although Article 1.1 of TRIPS was relied upon by the European Union only in conjunction with Article 28, the arbitrators treated it as an autonomous normative foundation for imposing cross-border constraints on members’ judicial measures. The article contends that this expansion of Article 1.1 goes beyond its text and structure, risks undermining legitimate public-interest measures, and opens the door to non-violation type complaints that are excluded from TRIPS. The analysis underscores the need to preserve the balance between IP enforcement and national policy space, especially in disputes involving public policy considerations.
OECD Two Pillar Solution: Designed to Prevent the Offshoring of High Tech Production to the Global South
By Abdul Muheet Chowdhary
The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) Two Pillar solution is a tool of the developed countries designed to: a) prevent Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) in frontier technologies like clean energy, computing, semiconductors, etc. from offshoring production to developing countries, and b) minimize Global North MNEs’ taxable profits in developing countries. The recent exemption of the United States’ MNEs from certain aspects of the OECD Global Minimum Tax further strengthens these objectives. South Centre Member States and other developing countries should resist pressures to adopt the Two Pillar solution and make informed, evidence-based decisions, while considering the benefits of other simpler and more beneficial alternatives.
Analysis of Intellectual Property Issues Ahead of the WTO 14th Ministerial Conference
By Nirmalya Syam, Viviana Munoz Tellez
This policy brief analyses the issues pertaining to the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) that were discussed in the General Council meeting on 16-17 December 2025. Despite the strategic importance of these issues, the divergence on TRIPS issues and on the priorities for the future work of WTO among Members did not allow the General Council to decide on any of these matters. None of the issues were noted for decision in the 14th Ministerial Conference (MC14), which is scheduled to be hosted in Yaoundé, Cameroon in March 2026. This reluctance of some Members to engage substantively on intellectual property (IP) issues has become a regular dynamic in the TRIPS Council. However, the MC14 should, at the least, decide to extend the moratorium on TRIPS Non-Violation and Situation Complaints and extend the period for acceptances by Members of the Protocol Amending the TRIPS Agreement. Moreover, there is an understanding that all issues remain on the table, regardless of whether they are taken up at the Conference.
Unlocking Innovation Traps: A Systems Thinking Approach to University–SME Collaboration
By Dr. Ufuk Türen and Syed Ibrahim Bilal Majid
Despite growing institutional interest, university–small and medium-sized enterprise (SME) collaborations often underperform, stalling before generating sustainable innovation. This study adopts a systems thinking perspective to diagnose such persistent failures as structural—rather than individual—challenges. Using OSTİM Technical University (OSTİMTECH) as a case study, the research employs participatory causal loop diagrams (CLDs) to visualize key feedback dynamics affecting trust, incentives, and knowledge flows. Central to the analysis is the “Success to the Successful” archetype, which explains how dominant academic incentives reinforce publication-oriented behaviors while marginalizing collaboration and applied innovation. The resulting model reveals why certain loops—like academic reputation—gain momentum while others—such as ecosystem learning—remain underdeveloped without intentional redesign. By identifying leverage points for institutional reform, including incentive recalibration and long-term partnership support, the paper offers actionable insights for third-generation universities. Ultimately, reframing collaboration through a systemic lens enhances understanding of complex innovation ecosystems and guides more credible, sustainable approaches to university–industry engagement.
Decisiones judiciales y sostenibilidad del sistema de salud: tensiones y desafíos. El caso de Argentina
Por José Luis Cassinerio y Silvina Andrea Bracamonte
En las últimas décadas, la judicialización de la salud en Argentina ha adquirido dimensiones crecientes tanto en términos cuantitativos como cualitativos. No solo ha aumentado el número de causas judiciales, sino también la complejidad de las tecnologías sanitarias reclamadas, muchas de ellas de alto costo, eficacia limitada o con escasa evidencia científica. Este fenómeno desafía los marcos institucionales, jurídicos y sanitarios, y obliga al Poder Judicial a resolver conflictos que tensan la frontera entre derechos individuales, racionalidad médico-científica, equidad en el acceso y sostenibilidad del sistema. En este trabajo se analiza la estructura del sistema de salud argentino, las características de las decisiones judiciales en materia sanitaria y la necesidad de construir un enfoque interdisciplinario que incorpore dimensiones jurídicas, clínicas, económicas y bioéticas. Se propone avanzar hacia estándares judiciales más previsibles que protejan derechos individuales sin erosionar los principios éticos de distribución de recursos en salud.
Health Equity in Global Governance: growing recognition in need of concrete actions
By Carlos M. Correa
Health equity is a foundational principle of global health governance that should ensure all individuals have fair and just opportunities to achieve optimal health, regardless of social, economic, or geographical disparities. The right to health is recognized as a fundamental human right in Article 12 of the International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights (ICESCR). This document explores the concept of health equity drawing on United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) resolutions and key instruments from the World Health Organization (WHO). It discusses the challenges and opportunities for developing countries in pursuing equitable health outcomes, including advancing sexual and reproductive health and rights.
The US Bilateral Specimen Sharing Agreement in the Proposed PEPFAR MOUs Would Leave African Countries More Vulnerable in the Next Pandemic
By Nirmalya Syam, Viviana Munoz Tellez
This Policy Brief examines the implications of the United States’ (US) PEPFAR Memorandum of Understanding (PEPFAR MOU) proposed to African countries on the negotiations for a multilateral system for access to pathogens and benefit sharing (PABS) as part of the World Health Organization’s (WHO) Pandemic Agreement. It recommends that African countries do not accept the MOU provisions on specimen sharing and data access that undermine national sovereignty and calls for a coordinated regional response.
Independent Panel on Evidence for Action against Antimicrobial Resistance (IPEA): Reflections on the Foundational Documents
By Dr. Viviana Munoz Tellez
The United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) invited the Quadripartite Organizations to establish an Independent Panel on Evidence for Action against Antimicrobial Resistance (IPEA) in 2025. The launch of the IPEA is planned for 10 December 2025 during the United Nations Environment Assembly (UNEA). The Quadripartite organizations (the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the World Health Organization (WHO) and the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH)) released in November 2025 updated draft documents for the IPEA for additional consultation with Member States and stakeholders. The IPEA will constitute a welcome addition to global Antimicrobial Resistance (AMR) governance, and should be established, starting small and building gradually. Several concerns on the proposed model remain concerning the governance structure, equity in participation, and the independence of the panel. This policy brief provides analysis and recommendations on key issues concerning the draft foundational documents for the IPEA requiring attention.
