|
||
|
TWN Info Service on Intellectual Property Issues (Nov06/05) 20 November 2006
The World Health Assembly this year adopted a Resolution 59.24 that mandated the establishment of an intergovernmental committee “open to all interested Member States to draw up a global strategy and plan of action in order to provide a medium-term framework based on the recommendations of the Commission on Intellectual Property Innovation and Health (CIPIH). The Resolution adds that such “a strategy and plan of action aims at, inter alia, securing an enhanced and sustainable basis for needs-driven, essential health research and development relevant to diseases that disproportionately affect developing countries, proposing clear objectives and priorities for research and development, and estimating funding needs in this area” The
Resolution emerged as a compromise between two Resolutions i.e. a A copy of the CIPIH Report, the Resolution 59.24 as well as a WHO bulletin that provides some background is available at http://www.who.int/public_hearing_phi/en/ The
Intergovernmental is set to meet from the 4-8th December
2006 in The WHO Secretariat has prepared some documents for the abovementioned meeting including the Agenda, Elements of the global plan of action etc which are available at http://www.who.int/gb/phi/ Do also note that the Secretariat held open online consultations for 15 days (from 1- 15 Nov 2006), and several submissions have been sent by different groups including the Mission of Brazil. For those interested in taking a look at the submissions, they are available at http://www.who.int/public_hearing_phi/summary/en/ Below are some news reports from IP Watch on the Working Group. Best
Wishes
By Tove Iren S. Gerhardsen (IP Watch) The World Health Organization will organise public consultations for non-governmental stakeholders on a global public health and intellectual property working group most likely in November, according to a senior official. Meetings are being actively held within the WHO secretariat, which has set up a inter-departmental system involving a number of staff dedicated to the issue. This is “one of the projects where the WHO is paying a lot of attention,” WHO’s Elil Renganathan, who is the operational head of the project, told Intellectual Property Watch. “[What we have] ahead of us is extremely challenging but a very important task.” The consultation will provide input in the form of a report for a meeting on the subject open to all member states and others scheduled for 4-8 December, Renganathan, which will be like a “mini-World Health Assembly.” Renganathan said that the WHO would provide information about the exact date and nature of the consultations two weeks in advance, but tentatively they are planned for November. They would involve the general public, non-governmental organisations (NGOs), academics and experts, he said. The IP project in question is an intergovernmental working group that will discuss how research and development may be ensured in the future into medicines for diseases that proportionately affect poor countries, or that are neglected in general (IPW, Public Health, 27 May 2006). The group was mandated by a resolution adopted at this year’s World Health Assembly, and was asked to come up with “a global strategy” and “plan of action” by the assembly in May 2008. Renganathan is optimistic about the outcome. “We will come up with something,” he said. Along the way, the group will report on the progress made and indicate “early implementation action” to the Health Assembly in May 2007. As reporting to the assembly goes through the Executive Board, the group’s first reporting deadline is effectively January 2007, the date of the next board meeting. WHO Seeks to Open Process as Structure Emerges Renganathan emphasised that the WHO, whose role is to remain neutral, wants the process to be “as transparent and open as possible.” Since the May meeting, details on the working group have been scant. Howard
Zucker, the assistant WHO director general for health technology and
pharmaceuticals, has been
appointed the political head of the group. Renganathan is from Also providing input to the project is a steering group of senior officials from the six regional WHO offices working on the group, he said. Within the WHO secretariat, this is a “cross-cluster initiative” although it is hosted by the technology and pharmaceuticals department. A number of WHO staff are involved in the project, either on a part- or full-time basis, Renganathan said. There is, for example, a technology group consisting of eight people who are participating part time. There are five full-time staff at the WHO involved in setting up the group, he said. Some countries have already started their own work, looking at the research and development framework that is needed for their countries, he said. WHO regional committees have also provided input for the working group, Renganathan said. The resolution states that the working group will be open to all, which means all member states, but also non-member states, liberation movements, intergovernmental groups such as the European Union as well as NGOs, who will take part as observers. The chair will also invite “experts and a limited number of concerned public and private entities to attend the sessions” of the working group to provide advice and expertise, according to the resolution. But first the member states will choose a chair of the group at the December meeting, Renganathan said. This is not the first time the WHO is using the intergovernmental working group model. Renganathan said, citing the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, although that project differed by being legally binding. Renganathan does not believe that the upcoming change at the helm of the WHO in November would threaten the IP project. He referred to the tobacco control framework, which he said was started by Gro Harlem Brundtland but finalised by Lee Jong-wook. Funding also will be a challenge for the group, but for the moment WHO funds are being used, and Renganathan said the project has “quite a bit of funding.” The WHO will provide travel costs for delegates for the December meeting from least developed countries in accordance with UN rules, he said. WHO IP Working Group To Address Conflicting Interests Before December Meeting by Tove Iren S. Gerhardsen (IP Watch) An intergovernmental working group on public health and intellectual property, which the World Health Assembly said in May should be set up “immediately,” is scheduled to meet for the first time in December in Geneva, according to informed sources. But apparently it is no easy task for the World Health Organization (WHO) to coordinate the matter. A senior WHO official told Intellectual Property Watch that the meeting would “probably” take place on 4 December, but there are apparently still quite a few pieces up in the air about the group. The
official said that the six regional WHO committees now will discuss
“how to go about” setting up the group, both in terms of who will be
part of it and what the substance will be. They are meeting in sequence
from 22
August to 29 September, starting with Southeast Asia, Africa, Eastern
Mediterranean, Europe, Western Pacific, and the Each regional committee would choose two or three governments that would designate representatives for a smaller group, which would be discussed at the December meeting, he said. The smaller group could meet before December, but this is still to be decided, the official said. The official admitted that there are “some very difficult negotiations going on,” adding that the work was very “complicated” as there are “different interests” involved. The official would not specify what the interests are, but referred to the history of the resolution upon which the working group is based and its many “angles and issues.” While the annual assembly mandated the WHO to manage the group, it also said that other stakeholders such as non-governmental organisations should be involved, and the pharmaceutical industry also has showed a strong interest in the WHO’s work on IP. Within the WHO, discussions and speculations about who will head the group also have been intense, sources said, amidst larger staff concerns such as replacing the late Director General Lee Jong-wook (IPW, United Nations, 31 May 2006). The WHO Executive Board will meet on 6-8 November to nominate a candidate for director general who will be proposed to a first-ever special session of the World Health Assembly on 9 November. Member countries may propose candidates for the director general post from 1 June to 5 September, and these will be forwarded by the secretariat to all member states by 5 October, the WHO said. The next full WHO Executive Board meeting is scheduled for January 2007. The May resolution mandating the intergovernmental group is entitled: “Public health, innovation, essential health research and intellectual property rights: towards a global strategy and plan of action” (WHA59.24, Agenda item 11.11). The
May agreement merges one resolution based on the recommendations of
the WHO Commission on Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation and Public
Health (CIPIH), and another resolution calling for a new global framework
for research and development put forward by Both earlier resolutions leading to the current one were debated. There were major disagreements among the 10 experts forming the CIPIH, on which the first resolution is based, with some being concerned that there were industry-backed views in the report (IPW, Public Health, 23 January 2005). Five of the 10 experts, from both sides of the issues, expressed reservations about the report outcome. The
The Art and Politics of Setting Up a New UN Committee Meetings with stakeholders, whom the WHO official did not specify, were scheduled for 21 July and 24 July. Industry representatives were not available for comment for this story. The WHO is in the process of putting together the secretariat, and “most of it is in place,” the official said, declining to comment further. All member states will be able to attend the December meeting, but it is still to be decided whether other stakeholders, such as NGOs, will be able to attend despite being specified in the resolution, the official said. “I
think I am satisfied with progress being made,” Tom Boya, first chancellor
at the Kenyan mission told Intellectual Property Watch. Boya said he had recently met with senior WHO officials, including Acting Director General Anders Nordström, to discuss the matter as in late June he was getting eager to learn more about what was happening. At that point there was no news about the group, other than that the WHO said that it should be ready “in the next few days” (IPW, Public Health, 23 June 2006). The resolution mandated the establishment of an “intergovernmental working group open to all interested member states to draw up a global strategy and plan of action in order to provide a medium-term framework” based on the recommendations in the April report of the CIPIH. The idea is that the plan will secure research and development of medicines, as well as estimates for what kind of funding would be needed, for diseases that “disproportionately affect developing countries” or that are neglected. At the moment the six regional WHO committees would discuss the group, Boya said, adding that the African regional group would meet in August and the working group would be on the agenda. He said each regional group could, for example, propose two member countries each to form a “management group,” which would have to be approved at the 4 December meeting when “weight and endorsement” would be given to a smaller group. Boya said the issue needs broader involvement, and he praised the WHO’s handling of it, calling the process “open, transparent and inclusive.” Earlier, the process of setting up the working group appeared to be focused on who within the WHO should be in charge, with some names being mentioned. Boya said that the group would not be linked to one particular department at the WHO. The WHO declined to comment on this point. Boya said the WHO had tried not to “dictate” the group, leaving it up to the regional groups and members to decide the composition of the final working group. He noted that the inter-governmental working group was a subgroup of the World Health Assembly and that one “needs a small group to guide its agenda.” The
4 December meeting is open to all member states, Boya said, adding that
the WHO would not choose who would be able to attend this meeting. While seven months hardly can be considered “immediately,” Boya said this was “reasonable” for the WHO, which at the moment also is in the process of appointing a new director general.
|
||
