8 mins |
Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in /customers/c/5/0/affordableflooringsolutions.co.uk/httpd.www/wp-content/themes/davejones/single.php on line 28
Notice: Trying to get property 'cat_name' of non-object in /customers/c/5/0/affordableflooringsolutions.co.uk/httpd.www/wp-content/themes/davejones/single.php on line 28
Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in /customers/c/5/0/affordableflooringsolutions.co.uk/httpd.www/wp-content/themes/davejones/single.php on line 29
Notice: Trying to get property 'cat_ID' of non-object in /customers/c/5/0/affordableflooringsolutions.co.uk/httpd.www/wp-content/themes/davejones/single.php on line 29
| Apr 7, 2022
The challenge of improving access to medicines for LMICs is therefore at a critical crossroads. One possibility is that the international community will allow the Doha Declaration to become a pawn in the high politics of trade policy, which is being trampled underfoot by the proliferation of TRIPS-plus measures aimed at further expanding access to medicines for the poor. The other option is to remain faithful to the protection of public health provided for in the TRIPS Agreement. This would mean reaffirming these principles, which distinguish them from trade negotiations, accompanied by the provision of sufficient resources to realise their potential. Article 63.2 of the TRIPS Agreement requires Members to communicate the laws and regulations governing the subject matter of the Agreement (availability, scope, acquisition, enforcement and prevention of abuse of intellectual property rights). WTO Members may make use of general transitional periods without having to inform the WTO and other Members. The TRIPS Council will review Members` legislation after the expiry of their transitional periods. Article 69 of the Agreement requires Members to establish and notify contact points in their administrations in order to cooperate with each other to prevent trade in counterfeit goods. In accordance with Article 4(d), a Member may exempt from the most-favoured-nation obligation all benefits, advantages, privileges or immunities of that Member arising from international agreements for the protection of intellectual property which entered into force before the entry into force of the WTO Agreement, provided that such agreements are notified to the Council on the TRIPS Agreement and that there is no arbitrary or unjustifiable discrimination against nationals. other nationals. Trips commitments apply equally to all Member States, but developing countries have been given additional time to implement existing changes to their national legislation at two transitional levels depending on their level of development.
The transition period for developing countries expired in 2005. The transition period for the implementation of the TRIPS Agreement has been extended until 2013 and until the 1st. January 2016 for extended pharmaceutical patents, with the possibility of a new extension.  However, the Agreement stipulates that Members must ensure the protection of plant varieties either through patents or through an effective sui generis system (i.e. a system created specifically for this purpose) or by any combination of both. The terms of the TRIPS Plus Agreement, which prescribe standards that go beyond the TRIPS Agreement, were also discussed.  These free trade agreements contain conditions that limit the ability of governments to introduce competition for generic manufacturers. In particular, the United States has been criticized for pushing protection far beyond the standards prescribed by the TRIPS Agreement. U.S. free trade agreements with Australia, Morocco, and Bahrain have expanded patentability by requiring patents to be available for new uses of known products.  The TRIPS Agreement allows for compulsory licensing at a country`s discretion. The terms of the TRIPS Plus Agreement in the U.S.
free trade agreements with Australia, Jordan, Singapore, and Vietnam have limited the use of compulsory licenses to emergencies, antitrust remedies, and non-commercial public use cases.  Fifth, the protection of public health should be recognized as a starting point in all trade agreements, whether negotiated at the multilateral, regional and bilateral levels, and should be avoided from the high-level “bargaining” that regularly takes place between negotiating parties. LMICs are not the only countries that would benefit from public health protection under the TRIPS Agreement. The issue of access to medicines to meet critical public health needs arose during the deliberate spread of anthrax in the United States by unknown persons in 2001. A possible deficiency of the antibiotic Cipro® (ciprofloxacin) prompted the manufacturer Bayer to accept voluntary approval. After intense negotiations, the United States and Canada agreed in October 2001 that Bayer would be allowed to supply increased quantities of the drug at a “significantly lower price” . The agreement rightly seized the opportunity that a major terrorist attack would not take place immediately and that stockpiles could be built up over several years. Since 2003, similar concerns have been raised about the need to stockpile antiviral drugs in the event of an influenza pandemic. Once again, a global shortage of a patented medicine, oseltamivir phosphate (Tamiflu®), has sparked debate about the importance of protecting intellectual property rights rather than protecting public health.
Although the use of compulsory licenses was avoided in both cases, they showed that LMICs are not the only ones to be vulnerable to major threats to public health. Following the fear of anthrax, the US government has expressed its commitment to public health on several occasions , including the reference to the Doha Declaration as one of the four main objectives for negotiating intellectual property rights in the Trade Promotion Authorization Act of 2002. This law authorizes the President to submit signed trade agreements to Congress for consideration under the expedited procedure . In practice, the US Trade Representative ignored the Doha Declaration in bilateral trade negotiations, citing instead the push for the globalization of stricter intellectual property rights [61-63]. The increased ability of diseases to spread across borders due to globalization means that the weakening of the capabilities of LMICs could therefore be short-sighted. While poor countries are significantly more vulnerable to public health threats than others, no country remains out of reach in a world of increasing globalization. Médecins Sans Frontières: Data exclusivity in international trade agreements: what are the consequences for access to medicines? Technical overview. 2004, [www.citizen.org/documents/DataExclusivityMay04.pdf] Reviews are at the heart of the TRIPS Council`s tasks to monitor what is happening under the Agreement.
Article 67 of the TRIPS Agreement requires members of industrialized countries to provide technical and financial cooperation for the benefit of developing and least developed countries upon request and on mutually agreed terms. Please note, however, that many of these members brought into force national legislation transposing much of the TRIPS Agreement before 1 January 2000. In particular, the TRIPS Agreement requires WTO Members to grant copyrights that include authors and other copyright holders as well as holders of related rights, i.e. performers, producers of phonograms and broadcasting organizations; geographical indications; designs; Integrated circuit design schemes; patents; new plant varieties; Trademarks; Undisclosed or confidential trade names and information. The TRIPS Agreement also establishes enforcement procedures, remedies and dispute settlement procedures. The protection and enforcement of all intellectual property rights must be consistent with the objectives of promoting technological innovation and the transfer and dissemination of technology for the mutual benefit of producers and users of technological knowledge and in a manner conducive to social and economic well-being and the balance of rights and obligations; Contribute. All WTO Agreements (with the exception of some plurilateral agreements) apply to all WTO Members. The members each accepted all the agreements as one package with a single signature, making it a unique company in technical jargon. The TRIPS Agreement introduced intellectual property law into the multilateral trading system for the first time and remains the most comprehensive multilateral agreement on intellectual property. In 2001, developing countries, concerned that developed countries were insisting on too narrow an interpretation of TRIPS, launched a round table that resulted in the Doha Declaration.
The Doha Declaration is a WTO declaration that clarifies the scope of TRIPS and states, for example, that the TRIPS Agreement can and should be interpreted in light of the objective of “promoting access to medicines for all”. Climate change and the WTO Agreement on Intellectual Property (TRIPS) Attempts to address public health concerns culminated in the Doha Declaration in 2001, followed by the implementation of the decision in paragraph 6 in 2003. Taken together, the two statements clarify the need for and available arrangements for access to generic medicines. One of the most important results was a derogation from Article 31(f) of the TRIPS Agreement, according to which a compulsory licence can only be granted for mainly domestic use. These sales excluded the production of generics for export to countries without their own national capacities, so that the poorest countries did not have access to generics. The derogation allowed a country to issue a compulsory licence for domestic use or export on the basis of public health requirements . The WTO is a forum for further negotiations aimed at strengthening commitments in the field of intellectual property, as well as in other areas covered by the WTO Agreements. Although the Doha Declaration extends the transition period for compliance with the TRIPS Agreement by least developed countries (LDCs) until 2016, it does not affect the original 2005 timetable for compliance by other LMICs. The distinction between LDCs and other LMICs can be misleading. LDC is a designation created by the United Nations to determine which countries are most in need of assistance. The list of about fifty countries is reviewed every three years by the Economic and Social Council (Ecosoc) according to criteria such as low income, low human resources and low economic diversification . .