Bridges Weekly Trade News Digest • Volume 7 • Number 3 • 29th January 2003
Informal TRIPS Council Reconvenes On Drugs Issue
The Council for Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPs) convened for a first informal meeting of the year on 28 January, to continue discussions on how to deal with paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPs Agreement and Public Health. Members discussed a proposal put forward by the EC earlier this year (available at http://www.ictsd.org/ministerial/cancun/docs/EC_para6_24-1-03.pdf) in an effort to break the deadlock in the negotiations. Little progress was made in the discussions, in which many delegations were unwilling to take a stance on the EC’s proposal.
According to paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration on the TRIPs Agreement and Public Health, the TRIPs Council must find an expeditious solution by the end of 2002 to the problems countries may face in making use of compulsory licensing (i.e. the practice by a government to authorise itself or third parties to use the subject matter of a patent without the authorisation of the right holder for reasons of public policy) if they have insufficient or no pharmaceutical manufacturing capacity. The perceived need to address this issue arose from concerns related to Art. 31(f) of the TRIPs Agreement, which requires that production under compulsory licensing must be primarily for the supply of the domestic market.
The EC had presented a proposal on 10 January which suggests the inclusion of a footnote to list "at least" 22 diseases, mainly endemic to Africa, to be covered by the solution on paragraph 6 of the Doha Declaration. In addition, Members could request advice from the World Health Organization to assess the occurrence or likelihood of other public health problems (see BRIDGES Weekly, 15 January 2003). The EC stressed that the WHO would not give advice to the WTO, but would rather give its non- binding advice to governments that would then take the final decision.
During the informal meeting, several delegations took a non-committal stance on the EC proposal. The US reiterated that it would await other Members’ reactions before deciding on its own response. Morocco, on behalf of the African Group, declared that it had not had sufficient time to discuss the proposal and would comment later. As one Kenyan delegate noted, the Group was concerned about the lack of a reaction from the US. "We need [the US'] views to continue the discussions," the official noted. "The fact is that their silence probably means they won’t accept it." Carlo Trojan, EC Ambassador to the WTO, echoed this concern, saying that it would be "somewhat difficult" to move the negotiations forward as long as the US did not react to the EC imitative.
While not discarding the EC proposal outright, several other developing countries, including South Africa, India, Argentina, Colombia and Thailand, voiced questions and concerns about the proposal. Argentina added that the African Group’s response would provide important guidance for them. Only Brazil rejected the proposal outright on the grounds that it would narrow down the scope of the Doha Declaration on TRIPs and health.
The TRIPs Council will reconvene for an informal session on 5 February at 9 am before the Trade Negotiations Committee (TNC) meets (4-5 February), thereby allowing officials from capitals attending the TNC to join heads of delegations in the TRIPs discussions. Chair of the TRIPs Council Ambassador Eduardo Perez Motta (Mexico) is due to report to the General Council at its 10-11 February meeting on the state of the negotiations. While Perez Motta had hoped to conclude the negotiations by that time, this prospect is now looking highly unlikely, and plans are already being made to discuss the issue at the next "mini-Ministerial" on 15-16 February in Japan.
ICTSD reporting; "Little movement for TRIPs/medicines talks as US stays noncommittal on EU proposal," WTO REPORTER, 29 January 2003.