In this brief, the Centre for Health Human Rights and Development (CEHURD) outlines the current legislative environment affecting intellectual property (IP) rights in Uganda. The brief also considers the implications of the Industrial Properties Bill on the right to access essential medicines, a proposed piece of legislation that CEHURD argues will undermine efforts to manufacture generics in Uganda. It unnecessarily requires Government to consult the patent owner before producing generics for the public sector. It further requires applicants for a “compulsory license” to go through the lengthy court processes, yet procedures for granting such a licence should be simple and expeditious. Due to a lack of sufficient knowledge at the population level as well as Uganda’s weak negotiating position vis-à-vis other countries and negotiating blocs, CEHURD argues that the current laws and draft laws are not taking advantage of the TRIPS flexibilities, which would allow Uganda to fast track the supply essential medicines to the public sector.
Health equity in economic and trade policies
There is a pressing need for Africa to bolster its pharmaceuticals industry, but it also requires the right policy framework, argues the author of this article. With limited initial capacity, countries need to be prudent about which drugs are developed. Different countries have different needs, and selection must be made through dialogue between government ministries, pharmaceutical companies, and local drug regulatory authorities. Good regulation is crucial, yet could prove most challenging. Many African states have patchy regulatory systems for quality assurance and little means to ensure drugs testing follows ethical guidelines. They will need to create and enforce watertight regulations to ensure that substandard or ineffective medicines don’t flood the market. But the development of a robust pharmaceutical industry in Africa can’t, and shouldn’t be, uniform, the author argues. States are extremely varied in their scientific ability, level of manufacturing regulation, and financial capacity to invest. She proposes that some countries could first set up a system to simply manufacture drugs based on existing formulations, before progressing to research and development. Others with more advanced biotech industries, such as South Africa, will have the know-how to innovate in drug development.
African ministers of mineral resources resolved, in a conference in Addis Ababa in December 2011, to move into action to reform Africa’s mining sector to benefit the African people. They set a brand new vision apparent in its action plan that includes these six points: Member States should reform the fiscal framework in order to optimise benefits from the mineral sector; Member States should explore the possibility of renegotiating existing contracts to secure a fair share of the rent; Member States should align their development strategies to their long term national development goals; Member States should ensure transparency in the collection and use of mining revenues; Governments could explore the use of equity participation in mineral ventures to capture a greater share of benefits; and Governments in collaboration with partners should build capacity of oversight bodies. Along with the action plan, the ministers reasserted the African Mining Vision (AMV) approved by the February 2009 African Union Summit. The AMV puts development outcomes at the heart of mineral regimes to stimulate the local economy and help prevent mines operating as enclave enterprises.
The fourth annual BRICS summit, held in March 2012 under the theme of "BRICS Partnership for Global Stability, Security and Prosperity", sought to strengthen ties between the five countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) in order to heighten bargaining power. And while the global media is focused on China in Africa, the author of this article argues that they are missing out on the story of trade between Africa and remaining partners Russia, India and Brazil. Outside of China, these countries remain some of the largest players in South-South relations and on the African continent. Trade between Brazil and Africa tripled from 2004-2010, totaling over $20 billion, while Indian trade with Africa reached $60 billion in 2011, with both countries expecting increased trade with the continent. And while Russian activity on the African continent remains low - at $7.3 billion in 2008 - it is also expected to grow.
Roughly a decade on from the launch of a new era of commercial and strategic alignment, China-Africa ties continue to mature, substantially altering the make-up of Africa’s political and economic milieu, according to this paper. The authors evaluate the current and potential scale of China’s position in Africa, and, in so doing, pose questions as to the role of Africa’s traditional Western partners in the continent’s ongoing economic progression. Bilateral trade in 2011 reached US$160 bn, up by 28% from the previous year, when China accounted for 18% of Africa’s trade (up from 10% in 2008). African exports to China increased by one-third in 2011, while Africa’s imports from China (23.7%) increased by 4%. Fluctuations in currency and domestic prices have little explanatory role in why China has undermined the position of developed nations in Africa, the authors argue. What counts is China’s foresighted engagement with Africa back at the start of the past decade, allowing Beijing to steal a march on Africa’s other partnerships. Importantly, China is well-positioned to be a significant player in Africa’s next phase of development.
The European Union (EU) has committed to concluding a new free trade agreement (FTA) with India, known formally as the Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement (BITA), by the end of 2012, but the BITA may have significant adverse implications for India’s generic pharmaceutical industry that supplies much of the developing world’s antiretroviral (ARV) medications and other drugs. Critics argue that free trade agreements that may create new intellectual property obligations for India can increase ARV prices, impede the development of acceptable dosage forms, and delay access to new and better ARVs. They also state that by pressuring India and other developing countries to accept new intellectual property rules for pharmaceuticals, the EU threatens to undermine the Doha Declaration, a TRIPS-related agreement that is intended to ensure that low- and middle-income countries gain access to affordable medicines. The schedule for the next round of BITA negotiations in September 2012 has yet to be released and preparations are shrouded in secrecy. Neither party has sufficiently acknowledged the impact the FTA may have on millions of the world’s poorest people, who rely on India’s generic pharmaceutical industry to provide them with access to life-saving treatments.
In this declaration from the fourth annual BRICS summit, held in March 2012, participants call for a more representative international financial architecture, with an increase in the voice and representation of developing countries and the establishment and improvement of a just international monetary system that can serve the interests of all countries and support the development of emerging economies. The declaration expresses BRICS’s concern at the slow pace of quota and governance reforms in the International Monetary Fund (IMF), calling for greater representation of developing countries by January 2013. The declaration reiterates BRICS’ position that that the heads of the IMF and the World Bank be selected through an open and merit-based process, and that Bank leadership must commit to transform the Bank into a multilateral institution that truly reflects the vision of all its members. The declaration also announces BRICS’s intention to set up a new Development Bank for mobilising resources for infrastructure and sustainable development projects in BRICS and other developing countries.
In a move welcomed by many in the international community, India has granted its first compulsory licence to a local generic drug maker to manufacture and sell a cancer drug, Sorafenib tosylate, which is patented by German pharmaceutical giant, Bayer, under the brand name Nexavar. Compulsory licensing is one of the flexibilities on patent protection under the World Trade Organisation’s Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) agreement, and it allows developing countries to manufacture affordable generic versions of patented medicines needed for public health in developing countries. Natco, the Indian generic producer, has already developed a process to manufacture the drug, expected to be ready for marketing in April 2011. It is anticipated that Bayer will make an appeal against the decision, which requires Natco to pay a quarterly royalty at 6% of the net sales of the drug, far below Bayer’s asking royalty of 15%. Médecins Sans Frontières said the ruling has ended Bayer’s monopoly in India on the drug and could set a precedent for making more expensive patented drugs available for compulsory licensing.
In this update to Medicins Sans Frontieres’ (MSF) November 2010 report on the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) - which has so far been signed by most developed nations - the impact of ACTA on access to medicines is investigated. Although a number of provisions that were harmful to access to medicines in developing countries were removed during the negotiations, the final text remains problematic, according to MSF. The agreement, for example, will undermine the ability of developing country governments to apply the Doha Declaration to protect public health. It puts medical distributors, non-governmental organisations and public health authorities at risk of severe penalties, while allowing for continued border detention of in-transit medicines destined for developing countries. ACTA undermines the role of the judiciary in protecting the right to health and balance private intellectual property rights with the larger public interest, and acts as a deterrent to the production and trade in generic medicines, as it provides for excessive punishment, shifts the risks entirely on to the generic manufacturer, and grants few protections against abuse. MSF states that it does not recognise the legitimacy of ACTA because it has been negotiated in secret with little room for public engagement. The authors conclud that ACTA is a cynical exploitation of concerns around unsafe medicines and is not a legitimate response to the problem of counterfeiting.
Non-communicable diseases (NCDs) are the leading cause of death globally, killing more people each year than all other causes combined. Furthermore, behavioural risk factors for NCDs fall increasingly on poorer people within all countries, mirroring the underlying socio-economic determinants. The need for prevention efforts through well-planned, cost-effective and feasible interventions across all levels of society is therefore obvious, the authors of this paper argue. The workplace is argued to provide an important setting for ecological models that ensure the both the policies and the environments that enable health.