| From: |
Manuella Donato [ profile ] |
| Subject: |
Fwd: ITPC TPP sign on letter for access to medicines by 14 February 2011
|
| Sent: |
Feb 9th, 2011 - 13:01:52 |
|
| |
*------------- Segue mensagem encaminhada -------------*
Data: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 22:38:14 +0000 (GMT)
De: Edward Low
Para: mtaagplus (at) yahoogroups.com, apnplus (at) yahoogroups.com,
internationaltreatmentpreparedness <
internationaltreatmentpreparedness (at) yahoogroups.com>
Assunto: ITPC TPP sign on letter for access to medicines by 14 February 2011
Hi !,
Please see letter below about how TRIPS+ are bad for access to medicines and
so the TPP FTA should not have TRIPS+ provisions in it.
Could you please see if your organization can sign onto it and circulate it
to other
PLHIV groups you think would like to sign on. (It's not about the
problems with the TPP generally, so hopefully PLHIV groups can sign on
because it's only about access to medicines).
Organisations that can sign on should tell Peter Maybarduk:
pmaybarduk (at) citizen.org by 14 February 2011 so we can use this letter for the
next round in Santiago.
If you have contacts with PLHIV or other health groups in any other TPP
country (Vietnam, Brunei, Singapore, Australia, Peru, Chile, USA, New
Zealand) who you think could also sign onto this letter, please send it to
them too. (Eg could APN+ sign on do you think?).
Thanks,
Edward.
-----Original Message-----
From: ip-health-bounces (at) lists.keionline.org
[mailto:ip-health-bounces (at) lists.keionline.org] On Behalf Of Peter Maybarduk
Sent: 07 February 2011 15:24
To: ip-health (at) lists.keionline.org
Subject: [Ip-health] Sign-on: TPP & access to medicines - Request for
organizational endorsements
Dear IP-Health subscribers,
Please see the sign-on letter below regarding "Safeguarding Access to
Medicines in the Trans-Pacific Partnership Agreement," addressed to the
Trade Ministers of the TPPA negotiating countries. We will present the
letter with organizational endorsements to negotiators at the upcoming
Santiago round, February 14-18, 2011.
If your organization would like to sign-on, please notify us via this email
address no later than Monday, February 14.
Thank you, and please feel free to contact me with any questions.
Peter Maybarduk
Public Citizen
----
February 15, 2011
Hon. Craig Emerson, Trade Minister
Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Australia
H.R.H. Prince Mohamed Bolkiah, Minister Ministry of Foreign Affairs and
Trade of Brunei Darussalam
Hon. Alfredo Moreno Charme, Minister
Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Chile
Yb. Dato' Sri Mustapa Bin Mohamed, Minister
Ministry of International Trade and Industry, Malaysia
Hon. Tim Groser, Trade Minister
Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of New Zealand
Hon. Eduardo Ferreyros, Minister
Ministry of Foreign Trade and Tourism of Peru
Hon. Lim Hng Kiang, Minister
Ministry of Trade and Industry of Singapore
Amb. Ronald Kirk, Trade Representative
Office of the United States Trade Representative
Hon. Vu Huy Hoang, Minister
Ministry of Industry and Trade, Vietnam
Re: Safeguarding Access to Medicines in the Trans-Pacific Partnership
Agreement
Dear Trade Ministers,
We, the undersigned civil society organizations, write to you regarding
intellectual property provisions in the proposed Trans-Pacific Partnership
Agreement (TPPA). We are concerned that intellectual property measures that
may be included in an eventual agreement could undermine patients' access to
vital medicines, and contravene promises of a new trade model and "21st
century" agreement.
Nearly two billion people still lack regular access to medicines in
developing countries. Although several important factors contribute to
this, one critical problem is the high price of monopolized medicines.
Intellectual property provisions that go beyond the standard required by the
World Trade Organization's Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of
Intellectual Property (WTO's TRIPS) - so-called "TRIPS-plus" measures -
restrict generic competition, leading to medicine prices that are
unaffordable for most people, and healthcare costs that can restrict health
programs' abilities to provide treatment or other services, in both
developing and wealthier countries.
The parties should seek to end the harmful impact of trade agreements on
access to medicines. In the past, the United States (among other countries)
has negotiated trade agreements imposing TRIPS-plus measures on trading
partners, and limiting flexibilities that could otherwise help promote
cost-lowering competition.
Therefore, the best result for many parties to the Trans-Pacific Partnership
Agreement may be no intellectual property or pharmaceuticals provisions at
all.
Nevertheless, we urge countries that are considering intellectual property
chapters in the TPPA to table alternatives to the TRIPS-plus model,
including forward-looking proposals that would:
* Establish TRIPS as the maximum standard of substantive protection
required by the TPPA and preexisting trade agreements in the region, and
* Assist the effective implementation of TRIPS flexibilities.
We are available to discuss these proposals and some suggested components in
detail.
The U.S.-Peru Trade Promotion Agreement, the most recent U.S. trade
agreement to be ratified and implemented, benefited from an historic
agreement between the U.S. Congress and the previous administration. This
May 10th, 2007 agreement achieved an unprecedented reversal in the
decade-long trend of increasingly severe intellectual property provisions.
Intellectual property provisions in the U.S.-Peru agreement make patent term
extensions and patent linkage voluntary instead of mandatory, and place
limits on the term and scope of data exclusivity.
The May 10th agreement fell short of adequately addressing access to
medicines concerns. Its provisions, including data exclusivity, still
imposed new costs on public health. Nevertheless, it represented an
important progression in U.S. policy. The other TPPA parties should insist
that any intellectual property text tabled by the United States build on
this progress, beginning by eliminating data exclusivity requirements. Data
exclusivity requirements compromise access to medicines and are inconsistent
with ethical standards regarding the duplication of tests on humans or
vertebrate animals.
Under no circumstances should the TPPA undermine the May 10th agreement by
insisting on stricter intellectual property measures than those included in
the US-Peru FTA. Under no circumstances should the TPPA require accession
or adherence to the terms of the controversial proposed Anti-Counterfeiting
Trade Agreement (ACTA). And under no circumstances should the TPPA impose
procedural or substantive restrictions on the ability of government
agencies, including those at the state level, to regulate drug prices
through reimbursement policies.
New Zealand's recent TPPA proposal states the parties "should be cautious
about moving beyond TRIPS standards under [the] TPP," noting that "there is
a tendency towards overprotection of IP in all our societies, particularly
in the areas of copyright and patents." New Zealand proposes an alternative
"TRIPS-aligned" structure, focusing on operational coherence and
enforcement, and capacity-building in developing countries. We applaud New
Zealand for introducing this alternate vision.
New Zealand's proposal is a better starting point for any regional IP
negotiation than the U.S.-sponsored TRIPS-plus status quo. There are still
dangers in each of New Zealand's proposed focus areas, including
considerably increasing the bias of IP enforcement policy toward rights
holders. This reveals the risks inherent in negotiating any intellectual
property or pharmaceuticals provisions in the TPPA. But New Zealand's paper
also reflects growing awareness of the dangers of TRIPS-plus measures and
rigid exclusive rights in many countries.
A 21st century agreement must not accept harmful 20th century terms.
Instead, the TPPA should look forward to new, open and flexible policy
models. The TPPA should facilitate, rather than impede, the parties
honoring their commitments to access and innovation. The TPPA should
preserve countries' options to "explore and, where appropriate, promote a
range of incentive schemes for research and development including
addressing, where appropriate, the de-linkage of the costs of research and
development and the price of health products," in accordance with World
Health Assembly Resolution 61.21.
Finally, the TPPA must respect the WTO's 2001 Doha Declaration on the TRIPS
Agreement and Public Health - not only in principle, but in practice -
including specifically Doha's guarantee that "the [TRIPS] Agreement can and
should be interpreted and implemented in a manner supportive of WTO Members'
right to protect public health and, in particular, to promote access to
medicines for all."
Broad public consultation, input and review of proposed agreement terms will
be essential to safeguarding the sensitive public health interests at stake.
We urge the TPPA parties to agree in Chile to release the draft texts and
associated country papers after each negotiating round.
We look forward to discussing these issues further. Please direct inquiries
to Peter Maybarduk at Public Citizen, 1600 20th Street NW, Washington, D.C.
20009, USA, pmaybarduk (at) citizen.org, tel. +1 (202) 588-1000.
Sincerely,
[Groups]
Public Citizen
Peruvian Network for Globalization with Equity (RedGE)
_______________________________________________
Ip-health mailing list
Ip-health (at) lists.keionline.org
http://lists.keionline.org/mailman/listinfo/ip-health_lists.keionline.org
-----
__._,_.___
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3427 - Release Date: 02/06/11
__,_._,___
--
Manuella Donato
Regional Focal Point - Latin America
Global Youth Coalition on HIV/AIDS
Gonçalves Maia, 1000/103. Recife, PE. Brazil
+55 81 99244408 | manuella (at) gyca.org
www.gyca.org | www.tigweb.org
|
|
Message
back to messages
