Negotiating Health and Autonomy: Data Exclusivity, Healthcare Policies and Access to Pharmaceutical Innovations
By Henrique Zeferino De Menezes, Julia Paranhos, Ricardo Lobato Torres, Luciana Correia Borges, Daniela De Santana Falcão and Gustavo Soares Felix Lima
This paper analyzes the debate over the international dissemination of data exclusivity as a form of protection for clinical trial data. This is a critical demand for pharmaceutical companies seeking larger market shares and longer periods of monopoly in order to recover investments in research and development and greater profitability. However, this is a sensitive issue with economic and social repercussions for developing countries that adopt this protection regime. This paper highlights critical issues for the political economy of innovation and presents a review of empirical studies that show that data exclusivity delays the entry of generic drugs into the market, increasing prices and reducing access. At the same time, its adoption has no benefits because there are no positive effects on internal technological innovation, nor reduction of the “International drug lag”, nor the development of drugs for specific epidemiological demands.
What Can Cambodia Learn from Thailand and India as It Prepares to Graduate from Least Developed Country Status?
By Brigitte Tenni, Deborah Gleeson, Joel Lexchin, Phin Sovath, and Chalermsak Kittitrakul
Cambodia is expected to graduate from Least Developed Country status soon, at which time it will be required to make patents available for pharmaceutical products and processes to meet its obligations under the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS). Given its impending transition from LDC status, there is a need to balance Cambodia’s intellectual property (IP) policies and regulations with public health priorities to ensure access to affordable life-saving medicines. This will be critical to achieving universal health coverage, one of the United Nations’ Sustainable Development Goals. This paper examines Cambodia’s IP laws and regulations to identify provisions that could reduce access to affordable generic medicines when it starts granting patents for pharmaceuticals. It systematically compares Cambodia’s IP laws and regulations with those of Thailand and India – two developing countries that have had some successes in preserving access to medicines despite the introduction of pharmaceutical patents. It identifies lessons for Cambodia from the experiences of Thailand and India in implementing TRIPS and using TRIPS flexibilities such as compulsory licensing to ensure access to a sustainable supply of affordable generic medicines. Key recommendations for reform for Cambodia include strengthening the use of preventive and remedial TRIPS flexibilities and removing criminal sanctions for patent infringements. Cambodia should reject any TRIPS-plus provisions in its patent legislation and avoid membership in bilateral or plurilateral trade agreements that include TRIPS-plus provisions as well as signing patent treaties and memorandums of understanding that may facilitate the granting of unwarranted patents.
Compulsory Licensing as a Remedy Against Excessive Pricing of Life-Saving Medicines
By Behrang Kianzad
The COVID-19 crisis intensified decade-long debates on the interaction between intellectual property rights (IPRs), competition law and access to affordable life-saving treatments and vaccines. Compulsory licensing of patented medicines is a tried-and-tested method to expand access, particularly in a situation of “national emergency or other circumstances of extreme urgency” within the meaning of Article 31(b) of the TRIPS Agreement. Some legislations, such as European competition law, offer a toolbox for curbing the exercise of IPRs if they would be found in conflict with certain competition rules, such as rules prohibiting excessive pricing by dominant undertakings. The paper analyses the interface between intellectual property law and competition law in general, moving on to the settled case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) on this matter. It provides a general overview of legal and economics arguments related to excessive pricing prohibition and the main case law of European competition law on the matter and discusses whether compulsory licensing as a remedy against excessive pricing of patented life-saving pharmaceutical products can be a viable and appropriate remedy. Finally, the paper offers policy recommendations relating to compulsory licensing based on excessive pricing.
New US Policy on Exercise of March-In Rights to Curb High Drug Prices: Lessons for the Global South
By Nirmalya Syam
In response to soaring prescription drug costs, the United States government recently announced proposed changes to the exercise of march-in rights under the Bayh-Dole Act, allowing federal agencies to license taxpayer-funded inventions to other parties based on factors such as accessibility and affordability. This article explores the implications of the US policy shift on global pharmaceutical pricing and access, particularly for developing countries. Drawing parallels between the US approach and flexibilities under intellectual property laws such as compulsory licensing and government use authorizations that are allowed under the WTO TRIPS Agreement, the article suggests that similar strategies could be employed by developing nations to address public health needs and economic considerations.
Implementing the Doha Declaration in OAPI Legislation: Do Transition Periods Matter?
By Patrick Juvet Lowé Gnintedem
The Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) provided for a number of transition periods allowing countries to engage in a phased implementation of their TRIPS obligations. More specifically, transition periods targeted the patenting of pharmaceutical products. The original deadlines for transition periods have expired for developed and developing country WTO members. However, based on the Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health and subsequent TRIPS Council decisions, least developed countries (LDCs) continue to benefit from extended transition periods. In the African Intellectual Property Organization (OAPI), after an amendment in 1999, the legal framework has evolved with the amendment of the Bangui Agreement, i.e., the Act of Bamako of 14 December 2015. As for the previous text, the newly amended Bangui Agreement consecrates the unification on industrial property amongst its seventeen Member States. The main objective of such an amendment remains to adapt its legal framework to the international environment and to the economic and social development needs of Member States. Yet only five OAPI Member States are developing countries; the twelve others are LDCs. Then the question arises: do transition periods consecrated pursuant to the Doha Declaration still matter for LDCs who have agreed to be subjected to the OAPI legislation? This paper points out that transition periods remain relevant in OAPI countries by application of the more favorable rule between the Bangui Agreement and the WTO TRIPS Council decisions. It is however noted that the OAPI current legal framework is still problematic, while its LDCs members are underutilizing this flexibility.
Promoting Jordan’s Use of Compulsory Licensing During the Pandemic
By Laila Barqawi
This paper addresses the difficulties in utilizing Article 31 bis of the Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS Agreement) on compulsory licensing for the export of pharmaceuticals during the pandemic through the case study of Jordan. This paper also recommends that Jordanian officials seek to capitalize on the pandemic whilst the Jordanian Defense Law and Orders are in effect to include Emergency Use Authorization (EUA) as a direct ground for applying compulsory licensing, introduce clauses similar to those introduced by countries who have signed FTAs with the US, as well as deactivate harmful clauses within its national laws that prevent the application and utilization of a compulsory license. Further, Jordanian officials should seek the opportunity, considering the change of stance of the Biden administration towards compulsory licensing, to re-negotiate favourable terms in the Jordanian – US Free Trade Agreement (JUSFTA). Moreover, Jordanian officials should also form a syndicate that calls for the overhauling of TRIPS at Article 31 bis when an EUA is invoked in any country.
Neglected Dimension of the Inventive Step as Applied to Pharmaceutical and Biotechnological Products: The case of Sri Lanka’s patent law
By Ruwan Fernando
Apart from the basic statutory definition in section 65 of the Intellectual Property Act of Sri Lanka, there do not appear to be any detailed statutory guidelines or judicial decisions to provide any framework for the assessment of inventive step in Sri Lanka. The current statutory definition is highly insufficient to evaluate the standard of obviousness in relation to biotechnological and pharmaceutical claims based on a combination or modification of a prior art reference.
The Courts in both developed and developing countries have adopted a variety of tests to evaluate the obviousness standard of a claimed invention based on a combination or modification of a prior art reference. Sri Lanka, as a developing country, should look at the development that has taken place in other jurisdictions and adapt the patent law to local conditions when developing tests or guidelines in a manner that is compatible with the World Trade Organization’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and its biotechnology/pharmaceutical policy guidelines.
This approach that is appropriate to Sri Lanka is twofold. First, it is most likely to prevent the issuance of patents on trivial or incremental inventions that do not provide any technical advance to the existing prior art and are a mere extension of what is already known in the prior art. Second, it is most likely to protect genuine technical advances to the existing prior art while at the same time enhancing competition and promoting local innovations so that the local researchers will be able to draw on the existing knowledge for the purpose of follow-on innovations.
Experiencias internacionales sobre la concesión de licencias obligatorias por razones de salud pública
Por Catalina de la Puente, Gastón Palopoli, Constanza Silvestrini, Juan Correa
El presente estudio tiene como objetivo analizar los regímenes de licencias obligatorias (LOs) en países seleccionados, en particular los elementos económicos de la concesión de las LOs, la determinación y negociación de regalías al titular del derecho. Para ello se realizó un análisis descriptivo y exploratorio de experiencias de concesión de LO en países seleccionados, con foco en las experiencias de los países en vías de desarrollo por su proximidad al caso argentino.
En particular se discuten los ejemplos de experiencias de emisión de medidas de LOs o de UG en países en vías de desarrollo. Con especial foco en Latinoamérica, donde sólo dos países han hecho uso de dichas medidas por razones sanitarias (Ecuador y Brasil). Además se examina la eficacia del empleo de LO o de UG en la reducción de precios donde se evidencian ahorros significativos Como conclusión se propone elaborar una metodología en relación a las regalías para Argentina mediante un rango de pago que tome en consideración criterios de accesibilidad y asequibilidad poblacional a la tecnología licenciada, así como la sustentabilidad de los presupuestos de los agentes financiadores.
Directives pour l’examen des demandes de brevet relatives aux produits pharmaceutiques
Par Carlos M Correa
Ce document fait suite à un document antérieur, Directives applicables à l’examen des brevets pharmaceutiques: examen des brevets pharmaceutiques du point de vue de la santé publique, publié en 2007 comme document de travail par le Centre international pour le commerce et le développement durable (CICDD), la Conférence des Nations Unies sur le commerce et le développement (CNUCED) et l’Organisation mondiale de la santé (OMS).
Le présent document tient compte des évolutions survenues depuis la publication du document de travail CICDD-CNUCED-OMS en 2007. Il comprend de nouveaux exemples de demandes et/ou de délivrance de brevets, ainsi qu’une analyse et des références aux initiatives d’un certain nombre de pays qui ont adopté des lois et/ou des politiques visant à prendre en compte les considérations de santé publique dans l’examen des demandes de brevets.
Avec ce document, l’objectif est de fournir des orientations pour l’élaboration ou la révision de directives sur les processus d’examen des brevets dans les pays en développement, en réponse aux préoccupations concernant l’augmentation du nombre de brevets dans le secteur pharmaceutique. À cette fin, un certain nombre de recommandations sont formulées en ce qui concerne l’examen des demandes de brevetabilité relatives aux produits et procédés pharmaceutiques.
Ce document est une traduction de la version originale des “Directives pour l’examen des demandes de brevet relatives aux produits pharmaceutiques” publiées en anglais par le Programme des Nations Unies pour le Développement (PNUD). Le South Centre remercie le PNUD pour l’aimable autorisation de publier cette version non officielle. Traduit pour le South Centre par M. Natanael França.
Pautas para el Examen de Solicitudes de Patentes Relacionadas con Productos Farmacéuticos
Por Carlos M Correa
Este documento representa un seguimiento de un documento anterior, Pautas para el examen de patentes farmacéuticas – Una perspectiva desde la Salud Pública, que se publicó en 2007 como documento de trabajo por el Centro Internacional de Comercio y Desarrollo Sostenible (ICTSD), Estados Unidos, Conferencia de las Naciones Unidas sobre Comercio y Desarrollo (UNCTAD) y la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS).
El presente documento toma en cuenta los desarrollos desde la publicación del documento de trabajo ICTSD-UNCTAD-OMS en 2007. Incluye nuevos ejemplos de solicitudes y/o subvenciones de patentes, además analiza y hace referencia a las iniciativas de varios países que han adoptado leyes y/o políticas dirigidas a considerar temas de salud pública en el examen de solicitudes de patentes.
El objetivo de este documento es proporcionar orientación para el desarrollo o la revisión de directrices sobre los procesos de examen de patentes en países en desarrollo en respuesta a las preocupaciones sobre el aumento del número de patentes en el sector farmacéutico. A tal fin, se formulan varias recomendaciones con respecto al examen de la patentabilidad de las solicitudes relativas a productos y procesos farmacéuticos.
Este documento es una traducción de la versión original de las “Directrices para el examen de solicitudes de patentes relacionadas con productos farmacéuticos” publicadas en inglés por la Programa de las Naciones Unidas para el Desarrollo (PNUD). El South Centre agradece al PNUD por la amable autorización para publicar esta versión no oficial. Traducido para el South Centre por el Sr. Natanael França.
TRIPS Flexibilities and Access to Medicines: An Evaluation of Barriers to Employing Compulsory Licenses for Patented Pharmaceuticals at the WTO
By Anna S.Y. Wong, Clarke B. Cole, Jillian C. Kohler
Under Articles 31 and 31bis of the TRIPS Agreement, WTO members may validly sanction the use of a patented invention without the patent owner’s authorization by issuing a compulsory license (CL). In the pharmaceuticals space, governments have historically employed compulsory licenses to compel originator manufacturers to license their patents to generic manufacturers before patent expiry, increasing the supply and reducing the price of patented pharmaceuticals domestically.
This paper evaluates the three primary barriers to employing compulsory licenses for pharmaceuticals underscored by members during TRIPS waiver discussions at the WTO: (1) a lack of enabling domestic legislation, (2) a lack of domestic manufacturing capacity coupled with an unworkable Article 31bis importation system, and (3) consistent political pressure from other members to refrain from issuing compulsory licenses. A survey of members’ domestic compulsory license legislation finds that virtually all members have enacted enabling legislation under Article 31 for the issuance of compulsory licenses to supply their local markets. However, implementation of Article 31bis is limited by a lack of enabling compulsory license export legislation, streamlined administrative processes, or both across all members, preventing members lacking domestic manufacturing capacity from importing pharmaceuticals. An analysis of USTR Special 301 Reports from 1994-2021 further reveals that countries have consistently been placed on the Special 301 Report Priority Watch List for issuing pharmaceutical compulsory licenses, with instances as recent as 2020. As such, general reluctance by members to issue compulsory licenses due to overt political pressure through the Special 301 Report is likely warranted. These results highlight a range of barriers preventing the full use of compulsory licenses for pharmaceuticals under the current Article 31 and 31bis framework, with the effects disproportionately borne by member states lacking domestic manufacturing capacity.
Lessons From India’s Implementation of Doha Declaration on TRIPS and Public Health
By Nanditta Batra
The major bone of contention between the developed and developing countries in the TRIPS negotiations was patents for pharmaceuticals. The US-led developed countries bloc argued in favour of patents for pharmaceuticals amidst opposition from Brazil, India and other countries. Ample evidence, including patented AZT for HIV/AIDS treatment, showed that patents could make life saving drugs prohibitively expensive. Notwithstanding the effect of patents on access to medicines, Article 27 of the TRIPS Agreement ordained patents for inventions “in all fields of technology”. While the genie was out of the bottle in the form of patents for pharmaceuticals, the developing countries were able to extract some procedural and substantive flexibilities like transition period, parallel importation and compulsory licensing to leverage the IP system to further public health. However, there was uncertainty with respect to the interpretation of TRIPS agreement, scope of the flexibilities and Member States’ rights to use them. It is in this background that the historic Doha Declaration on the TRIPS Agreement and Public Health assumed importance as it reaffirmed the rights of the Member States to take measures to protect public health, reconciled the interpretative tensions in the text of TRIPS Agreement and clarified the scope of some of the flexibilities and attempts to find solutions to the problems faced by countries that do not have sufficient manufacturing facilities. The Declaration which was initially dismissed by some scholars as “non-binding,” “soft law” has been held by WTO Dispute Settlement Body (DSB) to constitute a “subsequent agreement” which must be followed in interpreting the provisions of TRIPS Agreement (Australia-Tobacco Plain Packaging Case).
