Draft Resolution for Change in International Pharmaceutical Patent

Law
1. To make patent laws imposed on life saving drugs lighter. The price of these drugs must
be fixed according to the per capita income of the country. The ever greening has become
serious issue by which pharmaceuticals make some minor change in their patented
medicine and try to re patent it to maintain its monopoly and to raise the price claiming a
new innovation. When Novartis tried to raise the price claiming a new patent from 2500
USD to 70000USD, this kind of law was made in India.

The Indian Union Minister of Commerce and Industry, Shri Kamal Nath in support of the
new Indian patent law said:

The price of medicines will not shoot up due to patents, because of these strong safeguards,
check and balance. There are comprehensive provisions in the amended Act to deal with
issues concerning the price and availability of medicines. These include provisions for
compulsory licensing to ensure availability of products at reasonable price; parallel import
of products; acquisition of patent rights by the government; revocation of patents in the
public interest; and provisions to deal with emergency situations.

2. Putting extra patent fees on drugs and medicines which are not directly related with
human life and death like anti-aging creams. These high prices for luxury products will be
helpful for making up the cost of low price in developing countries.

3. Tightening the bio-diversity laws in developing countries so that giant global

pharmaceutical companies can’t extract from any country’s local resource and patent
the medicinal product they make with them alone. This is a serious problem as developing
countries becoming te least beneficiary despite being the source. To break this monopoly, a
minimum share of patents to the country from which raw materials have been extracted
must be given.

4. Pharmaceutical companies should improve developing country access to essential

medicines by issuing voluntary licenses. This would provide a way around TRIPS as major
pharmaceutical companies, as patent holders can bypass the TRIPS patent system by issuing
voluntary licenses to allow other people to copy their drugs under certain conditions. This
would make it easier for these pharmaceutical companies’ drugs to be produced generically
with the permission of the company and would greatly improve access. Pharmaceutical
companies can work with developing countries rather than compounding the problem by
imposing trade sanctions against developing countries. For example, in 2001, thirty-nine
major pharmaceutical companies attempted to sue the South African government for
passing a law not TRIPS compliant that allowed easy production and importation of generics
though the companies backed off later and are still operating profitably. This law will
actually help in the long term encouraging new innovation in low cost manufacturing by
which both parties can benefit.

5. Less bureaucracy in patenting procedure meaning the procedures must be simple but
law will be strict.

6. Making patent laws regarding GOM very strict. They must be given after proper testing
procedure on non-human species. The patentee must bear all the responsibility if any
disaster happens. If there is any violation of health issues after patent has been granted,
victims must be given proper compensation by the patentee pharmaceutical industry. Also
the patent will be canceled.

7. Although created under the auspices of free trade, TRIPS, was the product of intense
lobbying by the world’s largest and most powerful pharmaceutical companies like Merck,
Pfizer, GlaxoSmithKline, and Eli Lilly and of intense political pressure by the world’s largest
and most powerful countries (U.S., Europe, and Japan). To put it in perspective, the financial
power of these pharmaceutical companies relative to developing countries is reflected by
their market capitalization, which is collectively greater than the economies of Mexico and
India and twice the gross national product of sub-Saharan Africa. This financial power has
been converted into tremendous political influence both nationally and internationally. The
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), the most powerful
pharmaceutical industry lobby in the U.S., was a driving force in getting TRIPS adopted and
then played a leading role in encouraging the Bush Administration to use bilateral
negotiations and unilateral economic sanctions against countries that PhRMA believes offer
inadequate patent protection. Granting patent protection to pharmaceutical companies
creates pharmaceutical monopolies, which in turn translates into higher drug prices based
on the companies’ ability to limit access to these drugs. To reduce drug prices, the WTO
should consider a major reformation of TRIPS, in order to create a competitive market for
generic drugs in developing countries. If any country uses its pharmaceutical lifesaving and
crucial drugs to influence any political or military negotiations, that industry must be
stripped off its patent.

******************finishing: It is important not to get lost in the legal issues and

remember the human side of this problem. With big money, here comes big responsibility.
Patents are not a gift for drug companies to exercise power without responsibility.
I’ll repeat the word of the famous professor of MIT Noam Chomsky: By privilege here comes
opportunity and with opportunity here comes responsibility.

*************Hubohu bolte paro. No problem. Onek gulo line professor er journal theke
copy kora. Formal language thik ase motamuti.