The European Union's (EU's) commissioner of trade called on SA in early February 2006 to use its considerable influence among developing countries to facilitate concessions in services and industrial goods in world trade talks. In a veiled threat, commissioner Peter Mandelson warned that developing countries should make concessions quickly or risk losing the gains made in the Doha round of negotiations to date.
Health equity in economic and trade policies
SA must push rich nations
Buisness Day
Thai solidarity
PHA-Exchange
Thai AIDS activists and their international allies sought suspension of scheduled trade talks that threaten to undermine Thailand’s lawful ability to produce, import/export, and market low-cost generic versions of life-saving medicines. In January, in Chiang Mai, the United States and Thailand were scheduled to start the Sixth Round of negotiations on a proposed Free Trade Agreement, and were for the first time to hold discussions on a U.S. proposal to dramatically increase intellectual property protections for pharmaceutical products.
The great global vitamins conspiracy: Sanctions and deterrence
AAI Working Paper No. 06-02
A comprehensive examination of the global bulk vitamins cartels of the 1990s exposes 16 interrelated cartels with the largest discovered international price-fixing schemes of the late 20th century in terms of affected commerce and direct overcharges. The convicted members of the vitamins cartels were in absolute monetary terms the most heavily sanctioned defendants in the history of antitrust law. Yet, the impressive corporate monetary sanctions imposed worldwide were inadequate to deter recidivism.
The World Trade Organisation and sustainable development: a guide to the debate
Royal Institute of International Affairs
The paper concludes that there is no doubt that international trade can play a vital role in promoting sustainable development across the world even though its inter-relationship with the different pillars of sustainable development - economic, environmental and social - is both complex and different in each case. There is equally little doubt that current trade rules need to be reformed to better support environmental and developmental objectives. But whether the Doha 'Development Round' will do this remains an open question.
TRIPS agreement and access to drugs in developing countries
Sur - International Journal on Human Rights
This article examines the progress made in the process to lend more flexibility to the TRIPS Agreement for medical drugs, and shows how the Doha Declaration and the 2003 Decision of the TRIPS Board on the implementation of its paragraph 6 are insufficient to ensure a reduction in prices and the negotiation of voluntary licenses.
WHO Board adopts decision on trade and health
Third World Network
As countries rush to conclude bilateral and regional free trade agreements, there are growing concerns that these trade agreements could adversely affect the health policies of the developing countries. Against this backdrop, the WHO Executive Board has recommended that the next World Health assembly in May adopt a resolution on trade and health. Member States are asked to include health ministries in negotiations on trade agreements and the WHO Secretariat has been tasked to assist in this process.
Request for information about impact of liberalisation of services in Sub Saharan Africa
The EPA negotiations in different regions will, or are likely to, include liberalisation of trade and investment in services. Liberalisation of services can have far reaching consequences. Since Article 5 in the GATS requires that regional agreements have to have "substantial sectoral coverage" and eliminate "substantially all discrimination", many services sectors will be included in EPAs that liberalise services, even if Art.5 allows developing countries to liberalise less than developed countries in a free trade agreement. As this is done at the end of the EPA negotiation period, this is a dangerous process because experience has shown that if liberalisation of services is done too swiftly without the necessary assessments and regulations, there might be many negative consequences.
Further details: /newsletter/id/31268
TRIPS, the Doha Declaration and increasing access to medicines
There are acute disparities in pharmaceutical access between developing and industrialized countries. Developing countries make up approximately 80% of the world's population but only represent approximately 20% of global pharmaceutical consumption. Among the many barriers to drug access are the potential consequences of the Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement. Many developing countries have recently modified their patent laws to conform to the TRIPS standards, given the 2005 deadline for developing countries.
Why New TRIPS Amendment is a Bad Deal for Poor Countries
Headlining this quarter's HAI Africa network newsletter is a fact sheet about the recent World Trade Organization (WTO) amendment to the TRIPS agreement. WTO member states last year agreed to permanently adopt the "30 August 2003 Decision" as an amendment to TRIPS. This Amendment outlines the circumstances and procedures necessary for compulsory licensing in countries that do not have the capacity for pharmaceutical production. Access to medicines campaigners are denouncing the Amendment as an extraordinarily bad deal for poor countries, but representatives from the US, EU and pharmaceutical industry are, not surprisingly, welcoming it. This fact sheet gives an overview of the Amendment and why it is controversial. It's available on the HAI Africa web site.
'Schizophrenic' rich nations slammed on TRIPS
Panos Online Feature
International health and AIDS activists are up in arms over the World Trade Organisation’s (WTO) pre-Hong Kong approval of a controversial amendment to its intellectual property agreement, saying it will limit access to affordable medicines for the neediest countries - those that have little or no pharmaceutical production base. Activists say the amendment, approved on 6 December, is proof that the WTO has ignored those with expertise on public health and intellectual property, and buckled under the pressure of big pharmaceutical companies, who supported the amendment.