TRIPS dossier mired down in European Parliament
The European Union's ratification of a key amendment to an international agreement on medicines access for poorer countries has been blocked in the European Parliament, which is asking for clear commitments from member states.
The European Union's ratification of a key amendment to an international agreement on medicines access for poorer countries has been blocked in the European Parliament, which is asking for clear commitments from member states.
The Parliament's international trade committee decided not to issue an opinion as the Council has not responded clearly to its demands.
The World Trade Organisation's trade-related aspects of intellectual property - TRIPS - agreement provides for a system of voluntary and compulsory licences to regulate the production, marketing and import-export of generic products to facilitate access to essential medicines that are patent-protected.
Due to production difficulties in less advanced countries, a temporary and informal agreement was signed in 2003. This could become permanent if two thirds of WTO members ratify it, but so far just seven out of the 150 members have agreed.
In Europe, the ball is now in the Parliament's court. But the EP is in no hurry to agree to make this mechanism - which non-governmental organisations (NGOs) consider cumbersome and ineffective - permanent. The Parliament said in a recommendation last week that the agreement was at best a partial solution to the problem of medicines' access.
Recently the EP asked the Council and the Commission an oral question on this subject, but were disappointed by the Council's responses. The parliamentarians asked the Council to adopt a joint declaration to seek other solutions - especially financial ones - to the problem of access to medicines at an affordable price.
Several members of the international trade committee made the same request to Portuguese secretary of state for European affairs Manuel Lobo Antunes (Portugal currently has the EU presidency). But his responses were judged to be too general and were again unconvincing, according to a parliamentary source.
The matter has now been postponed until September's parliamentary committee meeting, by which time the Council will be expected to provide written responses.