Generic drugs from India which are meant for Latin American countries have been seized by European port authorities alleging infringement of intellectual property rights.
The Indian generic drugs shipments, which were headed for Peru, Columbia, Ecuador, Mexico and many other countries, included medicines for treatment for AIDS, Cardiac problem, schizophrenia, dementia.
Off late, there have been reports of increasing incidence of seizures of Indian drug shipments meant for other countries at EU ports on charges of counterfeiting and patents infringement.
Indian generic shipments were siezed at various European ports including Miami, Germany, France and The Netherlands.
Eurpopean authorities allege patent violations in the drugs in transit.The EU countries began implementing local patent rules rigidly since last year..
The new EU rules stipulate that any product with a vilid patent that has been granted in EU countries, if being transported through their countries, is also liable for confiscation under their patent law.
However, Indian generic companies said that most of these drugs shipped to countries like Brazil, Peru, Columbia, etc where these drugs are not patented.
Recently, the customs authorities at Rotterdam in the Netherlands had seized shipments of the generic drug losartan, which was manufactured in India and was in transit to Brazil. Losartan, indicated to treat high blood pressure, is not under patent protection either in India or Brazil.
The Indian government has decided topart file a complaint at the World Trade Organisation (WTO) against the European Union (EU) on the issue of seizure of Indian drug shipments at EU ports, as a measure to address the issue.
Indian government authorities have been engaged in negotiations with EU officials at different international forums during the last several months to find an amicable solution to this issue.
Though the government had provided data of Indian drug shipments which were seized at EU ports, the EU authorities have so far defended their action.
Generic delivery is legitimate under WTO rules, Oxfam and the independent Health Action International report say.
India and Brazil are going to complain complaint against the Netherlands before the World Trade Organization (WTO) as it seized a shipment of anti-HIV drugs headed from India via Europe to Brazil, Colombia and Nigeria.
However, the EU authorities continue to argue that they need to check for counterfeits as these are dangerous for public health.
EU is increasing pressure on developing country governments to surrender their rights to obtain affordable, generic medicines in order to protect public health, even though these rights are guaranteed under global trade rules, the report says.
European Union (EU) is showing interests in big drug companies before people who cannot access indispensable medicines.
“The EU is guilty of double standards,” says Elise Ford, Oxfam head of EU advocacy. “One rule for the rich and another for the poor. A crackdown on European pharmaceutical prices is happening alongside a concerted effort to further push intellectual property rules that prevent poor countries from buying affordable medicines”.
The seizing policy is also increasing the cost of medicine. Millions of poor people have to pay for medicines out of their own pockets, so even a small price rise can make them unaffordable.
karunakar said on Friday, November 6, 2009, 16:32
INDIAN GOVERNMENT HAS TO ACT–IT HAS TO CALL FOR CONSULTATIONS FAILING WHICHFILE COMPLIANT BEFORE WTO PANELS.ALREADY THERE HAVE BEEN 18 SEIZURES ,HOW MUCH CAN ANY NATION WAIT.THERE IS A LIMIT TO EVERYTHING.THE ACT OF EC IS TO PROMOTE THEIR LOCAL COMPANIES.THE MINISTER SHOULD PERSONALLY INTERVENE TO ENSURE CALL FOR CONSULTATIONS FAILING WHICH COMPLIANT AT PANEL OF WTO BE FILED.
Richard M Stallman said on Monday, May 10, 2010, 3:43
Bravo for exposing this nastiness. The same officials who are risking
the lives of people in poor countries would surely not hesitate to
endanger their countries’ own citizens, when their corporate masters
demand it. The citizens of Europe should treat this as a diagnostic
test for governments they must not trust.
However, there is a small but important flaw in the article: it uses
the propaganda term “intellectual property”. That term lumps together
a dozen laws which, in their rules and effects, have nothing in
common, and it applies a bias for increased private privilege to
whatever law it is used to describe. This issue concerns patent law,
and only patent law, so use of “intellectual property” only made it
more vague and less clear.
It is always better to avoid use of that term. See
http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/not-ipr.html.