Indian Patent Law: A Death Blow
To Cheap Drugs
By Randeep Ramesh
23 March 2005
The
Guardian
The
days of cheap treatments for millions of Aids patients around the world
are coming to an end, health agencies warned last night, after the Indian
parliament passed a bill that makes it illegal to copy patented drugs.
The practice of
copying patented drugs has made medicines affordable for patients around
the world. The parliament's move was to fulfil India's commitment to
the World Trade Organisation's intellectual property regime.
The copycat drugs
industry in India has forced down the annual cost of Aids treatment
from $15,000 (£7,900) a patient to a little more than $200 in
less than 10 years.
The country's "generics"
pharmaceutical industry now provides treatment to half the 700,000 HIV-infected
people in developing countries.
The supply of cheap
medicines was only possible because Indian law hitherto had no product
patent constraints.
Critics say the
new law will cut off the pipeline of inexpensive future drugs, such
as the "three-in-one pill" of anti-retrovirals for Aids sufferers.
"Under the
new legislation we will see new medicines only available for the rich,
while old treatments will be for the poor," said Ellen't Hoen,
the director of policy advocacy and research at the relief agency Médecins
sans Frontières.
"Many people
are building up resistance to the first generation of drugs and will
need the newer treatments. But without the Indian drugs industry, where
will they get cheap drugs from?"
Campaigners say
African countries, where health budgets are already stretched will find
it almost impossible to fund the new medicines.
"In Cameroon
we pay $200 a year for each Aids patient's treatment, which is an Indian
generic manufacturer's product," said Fatima Hassan of South Africa's
Treatment Action Campaign. "The latest drugs are only supplied
by western multinationals and they cost $4,800 a year. We cannot afford
those prices."
Under the legislation,
if a generics manufacturer wants to copy a patented drug, the Indian
government will have to issue a compulsory licence. The patent holder
gets a royalty, but does not have to consent.
But, Ms Hoen says,
there are two big problems with the new regime: pharmaceutical companies
can tie up such licences in court for years, and there is no ceiling
on royalties.
"In South Africa,
Glaxo tried to charge a 45% royalty. What we are looking at is a lot
of work for lawyers."
Activists were hoping
for a review of the bill and a longer public debate on the issues -
Indian MPs were given only a weekend to read the bill and a couple of
days to debate it.
Although there were
last-minute concessions, many within the industry say the bill bears
the footprint of multinational drug companies who considered Indian
generic manufacturers to be "pirates".
Ranjit Shahani,
managing director of Novartis India, said: "[The bill] will move
India towards the patent mainstream and support and encourage innovation
and investments in research and development."
Many in the generics
industry say what is being given away goes against the national interest.
Yusuf Hameid, the head of Cipla, one of the main generic manufacturers
of HIV drugs, says India can "not afford monopolies".
He added: "Medicines
in India used to be unaffordable until we adopted our patent laws in
the 1970s.
"Our population
and pattern of diseases means we have to increase affordability and
accessibility."
Copyright Guardian
Newspapers Limited