|
||
|
TWN Info Service
on Intellectual Property Issues (Nov08/04) Over fifty NGOs
have also written to the World Customs Organisation, raising concern
with its activities. Below is a news story on this, which was first
published in SUNS and is reproduced here with permission. A copy of the Open
Letter is available at http://www.twnside.org.sg/ Regards, ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ NGOs criticize
Customs Organisation's TRIPS-Plus initiative Geneva, 9 Nov (Riaz K. Tayob) -- Over fifty public interest NGOs and individuals worldwide
have registered their concerns about recent developments in the World
Customs Organisation, particularly the attempt to introduce intellectual
property enforcement standards for customs authorities that are higher
than the WTO's TRIPS Agreement. In an open letter
addressed to Kunio Mikuriya, the Secretary General-elect of the World
Customs Organisation (WCO), the NGOs raised concerns about the attempt
by WCO officials to establish the TRIPS-plus standards through the WCO's
SECURE Working Group. They also complained about the lack of dialogue
with, and involvement of public interest organisations in the standard-setting
process and the lack of transparency surrounding the Working Group's
work. The NGOs called
on the WCO to enable accreditation of public interest NGOs to the various
WCO bodies and in particular the SECURE Working Group, to participate
in discussions of any instruments pertaining to intellectual property
rights. They also asked
the WCO to make publicly available all documents that will be considered
in, as well as the meeting reports, agenda, and participants' list of
the various WCO bodies, in particular, the SECURE Working Group; and
to provide an opportunity to public interest NGOs to submit written
inputs on the documents being considered by the group. The NGOs also called
for the participation of stakeholders and experts in the working group
to reflect a balance of perspectives on the implications of SECURE standards.
The group should deliberate on the appropriate role and scope of IP
enforcement and of customs officials in these matters and accordingly
the role of WCO (if any) in these matters. The letter follows
a recent note verbale by The work of this
Working Group has come under severe criticism from several developing
countries on substantive and procedural grounds. The letter states
"IP is a complex topic and the subject of intense debate nationally
as well as globally especially since the establishment of minimum IP
obligations by the TRIPS Agreement", adding that "For developing
countries and even consumers in developed countries, these standards
have created severe problems in terms of access to essential items such
as medicines, knowledge and other tools necessary for development." Therefore, it is
of "utmost importance to ensure that the policy space and flexibilities
that are inherent in the TRIPS Agreement are retained, to always enable
the right balance between public interests and the interests of the
IP holder as well as to safeguard the right to development of developing
countries." The NGOs raised
concerns about "the expansive IP enforcement standards that were
being hurriedly pushed by SECURE", adding that "it is well
known that the push for stronger TRIPS-plus enforcement standards comes
from developed countries and their commercial entities that seek international
organisations to set such standards. Noting the recent developments
at the WCO, it appears that WCO is targeted as one such organisation". The NGOs stated
that the group and its draft standards employed by customs for uniform
rights enforcement (SECURE) are "tilted in favour of the rights
of the IP holders and go against the interests of developing countries
as they are TRIPS-plus in nature and will not only undermine access
for developing countries but also require these countries to divert
public resources into enforcement of private rights. "And although
the SECURE standards are purported to be voluntary', it can be anticipated
that developed country parties and other entities will put pressure
on developing countries to adopt these as national law, via bilateral
instruments or technical assistance. "The activities
also extend beyond the authority, capacity as well as the expertise
of customs officials." For example, the letter adds, "customs
officials would not have the capacity or the expertise to determine
whether a particular pharmaceutical product infringes patent rights
or is a legitimate generic medicine being imported for local needs,
consistent with flexibilities available within the TRIPS Agreement." "In addition,
the standards introduced could potentially work as a barrier to international
trade of generic medicines." The NGOs said that
"the WCO and the SECURE Working Group in particular needs to engage
in a long period of reflection and discussion before adopting any instrument
in relation to IP", because "if the delicate balance between
the public interests and IP holder as well as the policy space found
in the TRIPS agreement is lost, the consequences particularly in developing
countries will be dire". The letter raises
concerns that "despite the wide-ranging effects of the SECURE Working
Group's work and its implications on access to knowledge, the right
to health as well as other fundamental rights of citizens of the world,
SECURE only benefits from the inputs of the private sector which favour
a TRIPS plus enforcement agenda". In addition, documents
for discussion in the SECURE Working Group as well as meeting reports
and other relevant documents are not readily available on the WCO's
website, making it difficult for public interest groups to follow developments
on the activities of the WCO as well as of SECURE. Among the NGOs signing
the letter are Peoples Health Movement, International Gender and Trade
Network (IGTN), Health Action International, Act Up (Paris), Asia Pacific
Network of People Living with HIV/AIDS (Thailand), African Women Millennium
Initiative on Poverty and Human Rights (Senegal), REBRIP (Brazil), Mwengo
(Zimbabwe), Third World Network (Malaysia), Berne Declaration (Switzerland),
Consumer Union (USA), BUKO Pharma-Kampagne (Germany), Essential Action
(USA), Oxfam International, and Electronic Frontier Foundation (USA).
+
|
||
